Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 27 Jun 1944

Vol. 94 No. 7

Committee on Finance. - Vote 69—Supplies (Resumed).

Mr. D. Morrissey

The Minister devoted the greater part of his speech in introducing this Estimate to what he termed price control, and it was no doubt a very important and a very interesting speech in so far as it dealt with that particular matter. At the outset of that portion of his speech some of us thought that we were going to get a clear and explicit statement from the Minister of the Government's intentions with regard to price control for the future. We know from experience that the Minister, when he desires, can be as clear and as lucid and as incisive as any member of this House, but it appeared to me that he went out of his way to be confusing. The first part of his speech, dealing with price control, with inflation and so on, he sought apparently completely to smother with the line which he took in the second part of his speech. The Minister, I think, wanted to convey to the House and to the country that it is beyond the wit of man to get machinery to control prices. Nobody believes that. Prices have been controlled in other countries, very successfully controlled, and the Minister knows that quite well.

The Minister sought, again in his inimitable way, to put the blame for anything that might have happened with regard to soaring prices not on the Government or on himself or on his Department but on the other Parties in the House, and, with that way of his, when it suits him, of completely ignoring anything and everything which has been said in this House on the particular subject, he said: "We have not yet been able to get in this House from any of the other Parties their ideas or their views on this question of price control." Now if there was anything which the other Parties in this House made clear to the Government over the last four and a half years, it was their views with regard to price control. The Minister said: "I do not know whether we can now get agreement on such-and-such a course", but he did not tell us of any clear-cut decision taken by the Government. He talked about a new policy with regard to price control, but he did not indicate to the House what exactly that new policy is, or what is the machinery set up by his Department to give effect to what he called the new policy. He did not indicate whether the Government has at long last realised that it was inequitable, to say the least of it, that they should take very effective and very efficient steps completely to control wages and salaries while at the same time taking no effective steps to control in any way the rise in prices. In the whole course of his speech the Minister gave no indication as to what his Department proposes to do now. He admitted that the matter had become a national danger; that prices had risen so steeply that they could no longer be ignored either by his Department or by the Government itself; that it was absolutely necessary in the national interest that there should be a complete departure from the policy pursued in connection with this matter for the past four and a half years.

The Minister talked about the dangers of inflation. He talked about the sacrifices which would have to be made by certain classes of people if a new policy with regard to the control of prices were engaged in. Is not the Minister aware of the sacrifices that have been made by nearly all sections of the community in this country as a result of the policy which was pursued by the Government over the last four and a half years? Does not the Minister know the sacrifices that have had to be made by people whose wages were pegged down in some cases to the absolute pre-war level, without even an emergency bonus to meet the 80 per cent. or 90 per cent. increase in the cost of living? Does not the Minister know that it has been practically impossible for the fathers or mothers of working-class families to purchase boots or shoes or clothes for their children or for themselves? Does not the Minister know that, in the case of workingmen's shirts, which could be bought pre-war for 5/-, an inferior article is to-day costing 25/-? Does not the Minister know that children's shoes and boots, which pre-war would probably last six to 12 months, will not now last six to 12 weeks? Does not the Minister know that a suit of clothes which could be bought, hand-tailored, for six guineas a few years ago, now costs, for an inferior cloth—and we are not dealing with imported goods— anything from 12 to 15 guineas? Does not the Minister know that it is almost impossible for a working-class family on a weekly wage of anything from 35/- to £3 a week to purchase those things? Is not the House aware that, as a result of the cost of living being allowed to rise almost unchecked, we have had that position for the last four years? That is one of the reasons why the Minister's standstill Order with regard to prices was so acceptable to all classes of the community. I think the Minister will find that even a great number of people engaged in business, particularly those engaged in the distribution end of the business, will welcome that Order.

I do not want to go into the latter part of the Minister's speech, where he sought to get the approval or the views of the House on a Bill dealing with excess profits which the Government are thinking of introducing. It seems that the Minister's mind is the mind of the Government. If we are going to get the type of legislation foreshadowed in the Finance Bill, and if all the excess profits are to be collared by the Minister for Finance and put into the Exchequer, then I imagine that Minister will be rather inclined to welcome excess profits. The greater they are the bigger will be the windfall for the Exchequer.

I want to go back to the question of the consumption of wheat which, I understood the Minister to say, was 411,000 tons over last year. Will the Minister say if that figure represents the production of the flour mills, or whether it includes the amount of grain which the farmer got ground himself?

Mr. Lemass

That figure represents the amount of wheat that went to the flour mills.

Mr. D. Morrissey

Merely the amount of wheat milled by the flour mills. I take it that the Minister is not in a position to give even an approximate figure of the quantity of wheat which farmers got ground themselves. The Minister, in the course of his speech, did not deal with the sugar situation. I am rather interested in getting some information from him on that. We know that last year we had a record production of beet. In spite of that, the Department is rationing sugar in a very rigid way. Not only is it doing that, but it is depriving certain classes of business, such as confectionery, catering and ice-cream production of their permits altogether. If there is a great scarcity of sugar, will the Minister give the House figures showing the production of sugar in all the factories, as well as the consumption of sugar on the present rationing basis, to indicate whether there is a surplus on present production or not. I would like to know whether all the sugar produced is being consumed in the country, or whether there is anything in the rumour which is circulating, particularly in the south of Ireland, that a very considerable quantity of it is being exported, either in the raw state or as an addition to a commodity which we export.

If the Minister considers it wise to do so, he might also tell us whether there is any truth in the rumour, current over the last week-end, that further travel restrictions are contemplated, and that an Order is to be made whereby people who want to travel will have to go to the Gárda station and show cause. That, I understand, is due to the coal situation, not only to the quantity but to the quality of the coal available. I ask the Minister to deal with that because rumours of the kind do a certain amount of harm and can cause a certain amount of congestion on the limited transport facilities at present available. If people think that further restrictions are going to be imposed, they may try to anticipate them, with the result that you will have overloaded and, consequently, late trains. There are many other points that I might deal with, but I do not intend to do so. It is not my desire to take up the time of the House, especially in view of the fact that many Deputies will desire to speak on this Estimate. In conclusion, I would ask the Minister to deal with the point that I have raised about sugar. A great many people seem to think that a full supply of sugar should be available for our own people, especially having regard to the fact that last year's production of sugar was a record one.

Mr. Heskin

We all agree that the position, so far as the materials that we have to import are concerned, is a difficult one, and is bound to remain so as long as the war lasts. As regards the supplies that we are getting in, I suggest to the Minister that they should be used in the best interests of the people, mainly for the carrying on of business and the keeping in employment of those who are engaged in those businesses or industries. I want to deal now with the supplies of petrol. A few evenings ago a deputation of men who have been engaged in turf-cutting since March last, waited on me, and asked if something could not be done to provide transport for the 500 or 600 tons of turf which they have cut and ricked on the roadside. So far they have failed to get lorries to take it away. At a meeting of the county council yesterday a proposition was made that, through the Minister, the Great Southern Railways Company should be asked to put lorries at the disposal of private producers of turf so that the turf might be conveyed away from the bogs. In many cases those private turf producers have been working since March last, but, for the reasons I have indicated, they have not, so far, been able to dispose of the turf. Many of them are small working farmers, and at the moment their labours have not brought them in as much as a shilling. I would be glad if the Minister could do something to place lorries at their disposal or, in cases where lorries are available in their localities, give an increased allocation of petrol so that this turf may be disposed of. If those increased supplies of petrol were made available for a month or so, it should be possible for those men to dispose of the quantities of turf they have cut. As a matter of fact, I have here an order from a merchant in Dungarvan saying that he is prepared to take delivery of 500 or 600 tons of turf, and quoting a price.

I also want to ask the Minister whether he can give increased supplies of oil to those engaged in the dairy business. I was told in the Department of Supplies that they cannot increase the present allocation. The position is becoming very difficult for people who have large herds. Deputies are aware that, for various reasons, it is difficult at the present time to get people to milk cows. I fear that, if a small increased allocation of oil is not made available, many of those people will be forced out of production. A situation of that kind would have very serious effects in many directions. Due to the curtailment of supplies, it may be difficult for the Minister to do very much, but if there is any hope of an improvement in the position I hope that he will do his best to meet the demands of the people I speak for.

Another matter that I want to bring to the Minister's notice concerns the supply of oil for harvesting. For some years past we have experienced difficulty in getting permits. I have already explained the position to the officials of the Department in Ballsbridge. My suggestion to the Minister is that any owner operating machinery during the harvest period should have in stock at least a week's supply of oil—100 or over 100 gallons. I make that suggestion for this reason: that between the date on which an owner applies to the Department for a further permit and the granting of it a certain period of time will elapse. When the permission comes from the Department the owner has then to make a further application to the oil depôt for his supply. The oil depôts will not send out the oil, as they are also curtailed. I would ask the Minister, therefore, not to confine a man to a very low supply. He should have at least 100 gallons in stock for every tractor and even more, if there was any danger in regard to the supply from the depôt. That is a very important matter, as I know of occasions where machines were held up in the threshing period through running out of supplies of oil.

I do not know if lubricating oil comes within the scope of the Minister's Department. Many tractor owners experience great difficulty in getting supplies at present. I do not know if there are any laws or regulations governing the supply, but I should like the Minister to tell me the best steps that tractor owners might take to obtain adequate supplies.

In regard to heavy nailed boots for farmers and county council workers, that matter does not demand much attention at present, on account of the fine weather; but there is no harm in drawing the Minister's attention to it in good time, so that by the end of the harvest, he will have gone into the matter and have arranged a supply of heavy farm boots, especially for field work during the winter months.

As regards coal, on three or four occasions, I have asked several Departments about coal for blacksmiths. The supply for the month of June has been cut out completely in many cases. Blacksmiths require more coal at the moment, as there is more road work for horses and cars than for years past. I have complaints from 10 or 11 blacksmiths at present, that they cannot get coal for the banding of wheels. Even yesterday morning, a blacksmith came to me and said he could not carry on. The Minister will agree that creamery work and other such business must be carried on and that that cannot be done except by hauling milk to the creameries in ordinary carts. Particularly in dry weather, the bands become loose; so the Minister should try to make arrangements for a further increase of coal for blacksmiths for that particular work.

The position in regard to culm for lime kilns does not arise at present, but there is no harm in raising it now, as in a month or six weeks' time, those concerned will be starting to burn for the winter months. I would ask the Minister to do his best to meet the needs of the people on the lime question. We know that the lack of fertilisers has resulted in lime being very much used in recent years. The Department should, as far as possible, meet the requirements of those engaged in the burning of lime, by making as much culm available as possible, so as to keep up production without a break. It is a well-known fact that, if a kiln is left idle for a short period, certain heat goes out of it and it costs much more to burn the lime than if continuous heat is kept in the kiln. Therefore, a reasonable amount of culm should be made available to keep the kilns in production when they start.

Quite recently, I raised the question of an increased butter supply and asked the Minister for Agriculture on a few occasions to impose again a ban on the use of cream for anything other than the production of butter. Many people are grumbling continuously, as they find the butter ration insufficient, particularly where men are coming in to work and where workers are going out on county council work. Those people consider that the ration of butter at present is insufficient to meet their ordinary food demands. I would suggest—and I suggested it before to the Minister for Agriculture—that the ban be placed again on cream and also that the Minister for Supplies, or whoever is responsible, control the home production of butter. In many cases, we know that privileged people, who have the wherewithal to purchase farmers' butter, have been getting two rations. That is very unfair to the ordinary worker and to employers who are keeping men on, so as to have them for the harvest. It is hard to get them to bring their ration to the farmer's houses. Some people are in a privileged position, with double their ration, while others have only half enough.

Notice taken that 20 Deputies were not present; House counted and, 20 Deputies being present—

Mr. Heskin

In conclusion, I hope the Minister will see his way to increase the allowance of sugar in the harvest period. Last year, I raised that point in the House and the Minister thought then that there would be a lot of Departmental work in increasing the ration during the harvest time. The individual farmer or beet grower may have a varying amount of acres and I suggest that the allowance be made to growers on an acreage basis so that they would all get a fair crack of the whip. I think the Minister will agree, particularly in the case of those who have hired men, that a small allowance of sugar on an acreage basis should be made to them.

Mr. H.M. Dockrell

While listening to the Minister I was wondering if some of his remarks about price control in connection with supplies should not really have been concerned with the Finance Bill. I hope I am doing the Minister an injustice in thinking that they might be for the purpose of padding out his speech on supplies, and leaving the question of supplies for discussion by the House. I have always a difficulty in deciding where Supplies begin and where the Department of Industry and Commerce ends. Be that as it may, continuing to examine the Minister's remarks, one is struck by this fact, that supplies must come in before price control is of any use.

What we suffer from at present is an acute shortage of essential supplies. I cannot know, as far as certain essential supplies are concerned, whether the Government has any long-term policy, and is thinking for the coming year, or is merely continuing to carry on from day to day and from hand to mouth. As an illustration, take the position regarding coal and turf. In the present Estimate for the fuel production scheme we have an item of £980,000, as against £830,000 last year. The amount is up by £150,000. Does that mean that more turf was produced, or that it has become more costly to win it? The estimate for the Turf Development Board is up by £132,000. When discussing this estimate last year we got to the point that there was a considerable lag in making good the loss which the Turf Development Board had incurred in selling turf at 64/- in this area and at other prices in other areas. Another item that crops up under that heading concerns whatever losses county councils incurred in producing turf.

That leads to the further question: What is the cost of a ton of turf? I take it that the scheme has been running for the past four years. We all remember with what energy the late Deputy Flinn threw himself into the work of getting the maximum production of turf by county councils. That was very good in the earlier stages, but one would have thought that we would now be settling down to some sort of level of production; that we would have got the top off the bogs, won turf during the producing period of the year, and got to the point of knowing what a ton of turf is costing. Is not a ton of turf costing as much as a ton of coal could be bought for, if it could be brought in? The Minister will probably reply: "Oh, of course Deputy Dockrell is talking nonsense. He was talking about coal. There is not any coal to be got." That is perfectly true. What we want to hear about now is a long-term policy. The war will not last for ever. We want to know what is going to happen when it ends, and when coal is coming in—I do not know if it will—at the pre-war price. What will be the position? I understand that many processes have been perfected across the Channel by which certain residual products are extracted from coal, while the product that is left is practically as good for burning in grates and can probably be sold, if so desired, at a price considerably below the original cost of coal. In other words, cooked coal has become a by-product of the original coal. I do not know if that is a fact. Could the Minister tell us if he will have to fill in all the bogs after the war, or is he going to put a certain percentage duty on coal and try to carry on with turf for the future?

Still sticking to supplies, the next thing one would have hoped the Minister would tell us about was petrol. Are there any prospects of increased supplies of petrol being made available? I do not know if the Minister is aware of it, but the air is thick with rumours of improvement in the petrol situation. Could the Minister give us any hope along those lines? The Minister has not said anything about shipping. Is there any long-term policy of co-operation with our nearest neighbours in connection with shipping? It is idle to suppose that this country can be run on the present shipping fleet, which is sadly depleted. For a long time to come, shipping will have to be availed of whenever and wherever it can be got. That brings me back to the question of co-operation with our nearest neighbours. Deputies will, no doubt, have, seen that long-term contracts for the supply of agricultural products have been entered into between Great Britain and the colonies. I do not know if the Minister envisages an export of agricultural produce after the war, but the question which will arise in the immediate postwar period will be: who will give us supplies? Has the Government had any conversations with the British Government along those lines? If they are not on speaking terms with them, how about the Americans? I should like to remind the Minister that this country is drained of supplies at present. It is something like a cinder-heap. There is a facade which gives the appearance of supplies, but there is nothing in the country to keep production going for any time. In the post-war period we shall be faced with problems of exchange. How are we to get money to pay for supplies? Where are we to get our shipping? Will the Government be driven, in desperation, to arrange with other Governments long after every other country has finished its negotiations?

I do not know whether I am a super-optimist or not but, if one reads the Press, one can see the view expressed that the war may be over this summer. That statement was made by a person who knows far more about the conduct of the war than I do and, possibly, more than any other member of the House, without reflecting on other Deputies. One would like to know what plans the Government have for giving us supplies and for co-operating with industry. The Government are supposed to have a plan for almost every conceivable situation, but some of us would really like to see the beginning of the unfolding of the Government plans for the immediate postwar period. As I said, some people think we may be quite close to that period but, in any event, some plans should be unfolded by the Government for getting supplies immediately they become available after the cessation of hostilities. I do not think that the Minister has given us any light on this most difficult and controversial subject and I should be pleased, if, when replying, he would give us some information on the Government's long-term policy regarding coal and turf, shipping and co-operation with our neighbours.

Mr. Norton

The Minister, in the course of his speech to-day, dwelt on many matters which concerned the administration of his Department and wound up his speech by posing a question to the Dáil on what must be regarded as the whole basis on which the price policy of his Department rests. Before I proceed to deal with the latter portion of the Minister's remarks, I should like to put a few questions to the Minister on other aspects of his Department's activities. The Minister pulled the curtain aside to a small extent so as to give us an insight into the price-control operations of his Department. He stated at one time that price-control was based not upon the cost of production of an article or upon the material or labour-content of that article but upon a figure which would provide a return for the capital invested in a particular industrial or commercial enterprise. As the Minister subsequently discovered, and as he might well have discovered at the outset, you might have a situation in which a firm with a capital of £10,000 was producing goods to an actual value of £20,000 and getting an investment return on its original capital of £10,000. That firm with a capital of £10,000, which had been producing goods to the value of £20,000, could easily have decided to reduce its production from £20,000 to £5,000 and still, under the Minister's earlier price-control policy, would have been entitled to get dividends based upon its £10,000 of invested capital while producing an output of £5,000 instead of a normal output of £20,000. I do not know to what extent we still have a price-policy based upon the provision of a return on invested capital without any regard to the volume of production. If we have any legacy of that rather short-sighted price-control policy, I feel sure it must be in the drapery trade. Every member of the House and every citizen has been concerned with, and has expressed amazement at, the enormous jump in the cost of wearing apparel.

Reference was made to-day to the fact that in 1939 you could buy a hand-tailored suit at six guineas, and to-day you will pay 12 to 15 guineas for a suit of inferior cloth. I think that is a bare statement of fact. Prices ranging from 12 to 15 guineas are being asked for suits in Dublin City and in provincial towns, and much better suits could have been procured before the war for six guineas. The cloth in the suits for which 12 and 15 guineas are being demanded to-day is notoriously inferior to the cloth that could be purchased pre-war at £6 or six guineas. What is the explanation? It cannot be that the workers' wages have gone up. Obviously that is not the explanation, since wages have not been increased by more than 15 per cent.

If you go into the realm of children's clothing, you will find that the prices have increased enormously. The position of poor parents who have to prepare children for certain religious functions is simply appalling in the existing circumstances. The most many of them can do is to look at the shop window where the children's clothing is displayed and then walk away, consoling themselves with the thought that they cannot possibly buy the clothes this year, and they will have to try to provide some kind of substitute for the children who have to attend these functions.

What is the basis of control in respect of the drapery trade? If one looks at the balance sheets of drapery firms in Dublin city, one will find that they are making bigger profits than ever. Firms which, with considerable difficulty, struggled to make a profit before the war, have been making handsome profits within the past few years, profits they never dreamed of. While the well-to-do draper in the city is lining his pockets, and while his bank account will show that he is not suffering in consequence of the emergency, the plight of the poor, the working-class people who are depending on small incomes, is such that they and their children are clad to-day much worse than in pre-war days. I ask the Minister to take us into his confidence and tell us on what basis is price control applied in the drapery trade, and what situation justifies a demand of 12 or 15 guineas for a suit of clothes when a much better article could have been bought in pre-war days for £6.

It must be remembered that the cloth is not being imported; all our cloth is home produced. I know of no set of circumstances operating in this country for the past four or five years which would justify the enormous increase which has taken place in the price of clothes in Dublin and in other cities and towns through the country. It may be that the big retail draper is not the only person who is doing well; it may be the manufacturers and the middlemen are also getting substantial slices of whatever profits are being made. But so far as the masses of the people are concerned, it is extremely difficult for them to buy clothing, and those of them who have to rear families on £2, £3 or £5 a week are finding it utterly impossible to procure decent clothing for themselves or their children at present prices.

In the course of questions to-day I addressed some supplementaries to the Minister, designed to ascertain the precise position in respect of the release of cement. Of course, question time is not the best time to get a full exposition of the cement situation, but, in the course of his replies to the supplementary questions, the Minister indicated that the production of cement had been suspended this month for two reasons—one, because the cement factories were among the largest consumers of electrical energy, and the other because of the shortage of coal, which was an ingredient in the production of cement.

The Minister indicated also that cement production would be resumed next month and probably supplies will be available for important constructional schemes. The phrase "important constructional schemes" can have two meanings. It may mean that a scheme is important from the standpoint of the activity which will be carried on in the way of rebuilding, and it can be important in another respect. A scheme can be important from the point of view of providing employment. It is from the standpoint of providing employment that I shall put some considerations to the Minister. At the present moment there is a cinema in course of erection in Athy on which about 30 men were employed. These men would be unemployed or would be looking for benefit at the labour exchange or clamouring for passports to Britain if somebody had not decided to erect the cinema in Athy. The work is now at an end because of the scarcity of cement. From the point of view of the 30 men who were engaged in its erection, that cinema assumed considerable importance. It represented the wherewithal to enable them to purchase food and clothing. From the point of view of the State, it may be said that a cinema in Athy is not so urgent in present circumstances, and therefore they could not release supplies of cement.

I should like the Minister to indicate, with the object of enabling those engaged in the building trade to know precisely where they stand, what are the Department's expectations with regard to supplies of cement during the next few months. I appreciate the Minister's difficulty because of the shortage of electrical energy and the shortage of coal, but I think it would help to steady the position of the building trade if the Minister would indicate what he hopes for in the direction of making supplies of cement available. Perhaps he could tell us when supplies are likely to be available. If the Minister could indicate that supplies will be available at an early date for all types of constructional work, it would be possible for those directing building operations so to arrange the work that such portions as depend on cement may be undertaken at a later date, while other work could proceed.

The building trade is only a shadow of its former self, but it is a type of activity which gives employment at fairly decent wages. Even the present reduced activity in the trade ought to be retained as far as possible. I am sure the Minister will share my view that it is desirable that all possible information should be given to those engaged in the building trade in the hope that even the reduced volume of employment now given may be continued. Large numbers who were formerly engaged in the building trade are unable to find employment because of the general supply position.

I should like to hear from the Minister what the position is likely to be in relation to candle and paraffin supplies next winter. Within recent months in rural areas it has been impossible to get candles, although strangely enough candles are procurable in the City of Dublin, an area well out of the reach of the people living in the rural areas. Those people have told me, and I presume other Deputies as well, that it is impossible to purchase candles in rural areas.

Mr. Dillon

In summer.

Mr. Norton

And even in winter. I have had numerous complaints on that point. The paraffin position towards the end of last winter appeared to be deteriorating and concern is being expressed in rural areas with regard to domestic lighting next winter. I expect, paraffin being an imported commodity, that the Minister may have difficulties in saying at this stage what the position is likely to be. But here again I think if the Minister can take the citizens into his confidence and give them some information as to the prospects of candle and paraffin supplies over the next winter period, he will do a great deal to steady public opinion in the matter. He will do a great deal if he can reassure the people that their supplies of materials for domestic lighting will be perfectly safe over that period.

I should like some information from the Minister in respect of turf production. The season through which we have just passed was an excellent one from the standpoint of increasing turf production but, so far, I have not any figures which would indicate whether there has been an increase or decrease in the number of persons engaged in that work. On the assumption that the number was the same as last year, there ought to be a substantial increase on last year's production. It is not possible to say at this stage whether or not there has been such an increase without knowing the number of persons actually engaged. Apart from the question of turf production, I would ask the Minister to state whether or not he anticipates, in view of the coal shortage and the utilisation of iron rations of timber and turf briquettes to supplement the attenuated coal supplies, that it will be possible to continue the existing turf ration over the winter period and whether in fact turf will be available in the City of Dublin to maintain the existing ration. I understand that there is a substantial diminution in the quantity of turf held at the turf dumps. Transport difficulties may be further accentuated and, therefore, the Minister should say at this stage whether or not we are likely to have a continuance of the present turf ration over the winter period.

The fact that timber is now brought within the ambit of the rationing Order so far as certain city and urban areas are concerned might suggest that turf and timber supplies are short. If the Minister would give some indication as to his hopes regarding the supply of fuel, either in the form of turf or timber, over the winter period, I think the information would be very much welcomed by the public.

On the general question of the Minister's past price-control policy and the price-control policy which he roughly sketched for us to-day, I think the House is in this difficulty, that we have never been able to get from the Minister any precise statement as to the principles upon which his price-control policy was based in the past. To-day we got a cameo picture of that policy when the Minister told us that it was based upon providing a definite return to firms engaged in production, not on the basis of their production, not on the basis of the cost of the article, not on the basis of the labour content, but on the basis of the capital invested in the concern. He subsequently discovered that that was an unsafe price-control policy inasmuch as it was continuing to provide a return on invested capital without regard to whether the production increased or decreased.

The Minister has now indicated that he is considering a scheme whereby all what are described as excess profits, that is, profits over and above what are reasonable profits, are to be surrendered to the Exchequer and, presumably, utilised for general Government purposes. The Minister asked the House to give expression to its views on his new price-control policy, which he foreshadowed this evening, but I think the House will require a good deal more information from the Minister before it can commit itself to the acceptance of the principle of the policy he indicated or an acceptance of the details thereof. We ought to have from the Minister, for instance, an indication of the price-control policy of the past, the methods by which that policy was operated, the extent to which it was successful, either generally or in particular cases, and the weaknesses disclosed in the application of the various price-control policies to particular industries. If the House had information of that kind, we could at least mirror for ourselves a price-control policy in operation and measure the success or failure, either in whole or in part, of a price-control policy applied in the manner in which the Minister would indicate. It is because of the fact that we have not had that information in the past and that we do not know at what points the Minister's price-control policy has broken down, that it is difficult to express an opinion in regard to the Minister's foreshadowed price-control policy of the future.

Generally speaking, I think it might be said that if a firm were allowed a reasonable ratio of profit, it ought to be satisfied with that ratio of profit and to recognise that, in an emergency situation of this kind, profits surplus to what was considered reasonable ought to be surrendered to the State. That appears to me to be, in the abstract, an essentially equitable arrangement, but an arrangement may be essentially equitable in theory and may not be possible of implementation.

In the absence of some further information as to the methods of price control applied in the past I find it difficult, as Deputy Mulcahy found it difficulty, to express any opinion as to my attitude towards the foreshadowed price-control policy. I think, however, that the Minister has been wise in recognising that prices have risen so rapidly and so steeply that it is impossible to contemplate further price increase unless at the cost of a further debasement of the standard of living of the masses of the people who depend on low and fixed incomes, to say nothing of the plight of those who have no incomes whatsoever. According to the Minister's figures prices have increased on an average by over 70 per cent. over the past 4½ years. Some items, such as clothing and fuel, have increased by much more than 70 per cent. The average figure is to some extent illusory because some of the articles which people require at particular times have increased to an extent greater than the general average increase. It is difficult, therefore, to imagine that the Government could contemplate the continuance of whatever price-control policy they have been pursuing, which would result in further increases in prices, without their being compelled to recognise, on the other hand, that such a policy, which appeared to operate from one standpoint, creating an upward movement in price levels, must be accompanied by a debasement of the standard of living of the masses of the people.

The Minister indicated that the production policy pursued by the Government and the price control policy pursued by the Government were based upon cognisance of certain social advantages, such as the maintenance of workers in employment, the maintenance of units of production which were not highly efficient because they were carrying a labour content which, perhaps, was higher than the normal labour content would be if production were on a pre-war basis. These are, admittedly, social advantages. They have an effect of steadying the whole social and economic position, and it is not easy to see a State contemplating an abandonment of practices which helped to steady employment in any sphere of activity. If the Minister wants to get the co-operation of the House on a price-control policy and to get a better public understanding of his difficulties and of the difficulties inherent in price control, he must give the House much more information than he has given.

I hope, therefore, that in the course of his reply, or on some suitable occasion after the summer recess, the Minister will be able to indicate to the House in much greater detail than he did to-day the basis of his past price-control policy, and give us some indication of the weaknesses revealed in that policy, so that we can measure up to the advantages of the price-control policy which he indicated was likely to be adopted in future. I think the Minister's whole purpose in this matter ought to be to create an informed public opinion which will understand the difficulties and the dangers, which will see the disadvantages and, at the same time, weigh up the advantages of a definite price-control policy. The more information which the Minister can disseminate in the matter the more he will be able to create that informed public opinion. As the Minister has indicated the direction in which his mind and the minds of the Government were travelling, he ought to avail of an early opportunity of taking the House further into his confidence and give us much more information as to the past price-control policy and much more definite details as to the principles and methods on which he hopes to implement the price-control policy which he outlined for us to-day.

Mr. Corry

I should like to refer, in the first instance, to a circular which has been sent to the county councils as to the production of turf and the supply of turf to their own institutions. I understand that that circular was sent out by the Department of Local Government on the instruction of the Minister for Supplies, and stated that the county councils are to endeavour to supply their own institutions from private sources, and that the turf produced by them is to be handed over to Fuel Importers Limited. If that is the position, it will mean a very definite loss to the county councils. If the county councils have, first, to supply the turf to Fuel Importers Limited, and afterwards are compelled to buy back that turf from Fuel Importers Limited to supply their own institutions, it will mean a difference of between 24/- and 30/- per ton in the price of the turf. It seems rather a peculiar position to create in regard to county councils, which are at present engaged in producing turf not alone for their own institutions, but for the public at large as well, and whose overdrafts in that respect have not, in my opinion, at any rate, and in the opinion of the county councils, been dealt with properly by the Minister and his Department.

Some two years ago I raised the whole question of the costings of turf brought by Fuel Importers, Ltd., into cities, put into dumps, and afterwards taken out again. I understand that even at 64/- per ton that turf does not pay. I have got figures in regard to one case in Cork which I have studied closely. As against the 7/- or 8/- per day, which is the controlled wage price laid down for turf cutters, people who can pay from 17/6 to £1 per day to turf cutters can bring their turf into the city and sell it at the controlled price of 64/- and make a profit out of it. When you compare with that the 7/- or 8/- per day paid to the men on the bogs, the 16/6 per day to the workers in the city for taking it out of the wagons and throwing it into a heap, and the dead loss that is entailed in that, to my mind it is a shiftless procedure. I cannot describe it as anything else. Instead of this endeavour to compel all turf to go through the hands of Fuel Importers, Ltd., it would be a far better system if you could get that turf delivered direct to the consumers from the bogs.

Deputy Morrissey referred to the question of sugar. I am all at one with the Minister if his policy is to see that there is sufficient sugar in this country to cover any period of scarcity that may arise if the factories break down or, as will definitely happen this year, we have only a 50 per cent. tonnage of beet despite the record acreage. In my own constituency I have seen practically 25 per cent. of the crop ploughed up in the last fortnight because it was a complete failure. I am also deeply concerned with the price policy for agricultural products as compared with the price policy for industrial products. In connection with Irish Steel, Ltd., for instance, I understand the overhead charges had to be based on the smaller quantity of material produced, thus driving up the price of iron enormously to the consumer. I am glad to see that, owing to the large quantity of billets which we got in lately, the price of iron has fallen considerably. But I should like to know from the Minister on what basis he fixed the price for beet this year. I know that for the past two years he has not got any beet costings from the Beet Growers' Association. I know, further, that there were no discussions between the Beet Growers' Association and the sugar company before the price was fixed this year. I should like to know, in the first instance, on what basis the Minister fixed the price of beet. I should like to know, secondly, whether in fixing that price he took into consideration a season like the present and the loss that may be entailed to beet growers generally by the fact that they will have only a 50 per cent. tonnage from their crop, and whether he is prepared to treat the agricultural community in the same way as the industrialists are being treated, and allow them compensation for that loss, which is not due to any fault of theirs. These are matters which deeply concern us as producers of agricultural products. This year we find ourselves with a record acreage of beet but, owing to weather conditions during the past three months, the beet will not produce an average of four tons to the acre this year. If a certain policy has been laid down with regard to industrial production, I think the same policy should apply to agricultural production, because the agricultural community are producing essential food for the people. These are matters with which I should like the Minister to deal.

One of the Deputies from Waterford spoke about the difficulties of getting supplies of kerosene. I should like to pay this tribute to the Minister's Department in regard to kerosene supply. There is no difficulty whatever in tractor owners getting a sufficient supply of kerosene, or having any trouble whatever with the Department in connection with it, if they carry out the simple instructions which the Department has given them. As I said, as one who has to deal with a very large area in which tractor work is carried on, if the people concerned send in their log-sheets in time, and while they have a sufficient supply on hand, there is no difficulty whatever, and I think that we have now come to the period where the black-marketeers in kerosene are practically wiped off the map, and I am very glad of it. I certainly must pay that tribute to the kerosene section of the Minister's Department; its work is second to none anywhere. At any rate, that has been my personal experience.

I am rather worried, however, about what I consider to be the wastage of petrol in the bringing in of long-distance stuff to the cities. I find, for instance, that the Great Southern Railways Company are getting as much as 19 gallons of petrol in order to bring in one lorry-load of turf to Cork City. Now, I do not know which of the two would be best for heating purposes, but I think that to use 19 gallons of petrol to bring in that turf to Cork City is over-stepping the mark. Of course, the Minister can give us figures with regard to the areas from which the turf is being drawn, but I can tell him that yesterday, in the Cork County Council, we had a very definite complaint with regard to the heating of turf ricks on the bog, owing to lack of transport facilities and the hold-up of turf production in those particular bogs on that account. We have had an exceptional season, and whatever argument there may or may not have been in previous years about turf, this is a year in which turf can be produced easily and with very little trouble, and I think it would be a scandal if that turf is now left to deteriorate on the bogs for want of proper transport facilities to get it out. I think that any hold-up in that respect should be dealt with immediately and very firmly. I have heard statements by county surveyors in Cork as to the difficulty of getting transport for the removal of turf from the bogs.

In that connection, I should also like to have a definite statement from the Minister as to the instructions issued to the county councils in regard to supplying their own institutions with turf. I think that the institutions maintained by a county council should have first call on the turf produced, in the first instance, at the expense of the ratepayers of the county, and that any endeavour to blackmail—I cannot describe it by any other word—the county council and compel it to pay so much a day to bring the turf into Cork City and then pay for its re-delivery out to these institutions is something that should not be tolerated.

If there is turf in the hands of private suppliers or private individuals, which can be purchased, then I suggest that Fuel Importers, Limited, should purchase it themselves. If there are private owners or holders of turf in Cork, it should be an easy matter for Fuel Importers Limited, to get in touch with these people and let them supply the county institutions. As a matter of fact, we found yesterday that the county council had to give up a lot of contracts as a result of the disorder in the Department of Supplies, and I should like to have some definite information on that point.

Mr. Dillon

First of all, Sir, I should like to direct the Minister's attention to one minor matter—indeed, it is not a minor matter from my point of view, but, possibly, might be from the point of view of the nation—and that is the fuel position in County Monaghan. Up to this year, the scarcity of fuel in that county has been greatly mitigated by the quantity of timber that was available there. The cutting of that timber, however, has gone on during the last three years of the emergency, with the result that the supply of timber has been greatly reduced, and now we are in the position in that county of actually cutting the roads in order to get at the turf which lies under them. That, I think, should be eloquent of the extremities to which the local authority there has been driven in order to get supplies of turf for the people of the county. I think that every available inch of bog in the county is being, or has been, exploited during the last three months at least, in order to secure the maximum quantity of mud turf for the people there, and I invite the Minister to direct the attention of the appropriate division of his Department to the making of a survey of the fuel situation in that county so that plans may be made to supplement the supplies available when winter comes. I forbear from engaging in a protracted discussion of the situation there, because I am sure that the Minister has available a sufficient number of officials to deal with it.

Now, I want to direct the attention of this House to the studied policy of the Minister during the last few years, of using the medium either of Radio Éireann or Dáil Éireann to "cry havoc" and tell the people of this country that the situation is terrible, that it is one of despair, that it is frightful in general, and that he despairs of being able to cope with it; and then, six months afterwards, we have An Taoiseach getting up and saying that the situation has been saved, and that it is all due to Deputy Seán Lemass, who is one of the most remarkable men, because, faced with the situation which prevailed six months ago, he was able to cope with it and to carry the nation through to safety —all due to the ability of this remarkable man, Deputy Seán Lemass.

In that connection, I think this is the third time we have been told that there is not an ounce of coal to come in and that, as a result, many industries will have to close down. If it is true that fuel is so short, why is it that the streets of Ballaghaderreen are lit with electricity in broad moonlight, when you can barely see the lamps burning because of the bright moonlight? We are familiar with the black-out that prevailed here at the beginning of the war and that still prevails in Great Britain, where all public lighting is quenched so that no, light can be seen by an enemy. Surely there would be nothing wrong in directing the local inspectors of the Electricity Supply Board to turn off the street lights in rural towns on the occasion of a full moon. I understand that in certain towns the local inspector, doing what any commonsense man would do, when he saw the streets lighted up in brilliant moonlight, turned off the lamps but they were immediately turned on again under orders from another Department. It is very hard to carry conviction to your neighbours to measure every sod of turf that they put on the fire and to use every conceivable expedient before they burn more fuel, if they see large quantities of electric power being wasted nightly on the streets of small towns. I declare that there is as much electricity being wasted on the streets of small towns in rural Ireland as would provide an increase of 50 per cent. in the domestic ration of the citizens of that small town. Now, I think every Deputy is anxious to co-operate and everyone is willing to bear his share of the inconvenience inseparable from this emergency, but it is truly madness that women should be driven to the utmost extremity to cook their children's food when they see outside their bedroom windows the very power which they require to heat the baby's milk being used in illuminating streets which do not require illumination.

The other side of the story is this. I have very little patience with people who say to the Minister for Supplies: "Tell us what the position is going to be in regard to supplies of paraffin and candles next winter." How can the Minister tell anybody what the position will be in regard to these supplies next winter? The Minister for Supplies has to depend on whatever supplies of paraffin oil and candles Great Britain and the United States are willing to deliver to this country. I think it is no small tribute to the Minister that he has been able to prevail upon them to continue such deliveries up to the present. I wish him the best of good luck in his efforts to get further supplies of these commodities from Britain and the United States. The best I think that any man could say is that, bearing in mind the liberality and the generosity of these two countries in the past, we may reasonably expect them to send us whatever they can spare us in the future. In regard to candles, I understand that the Department took the very sensible step of suspending the distribution of candles during mid-summer with a view to saving up whatever candles may be available for the winter months.

In that connection, when the Minister proposes to release candles, surely he might relate the distribution of paraffin wax candles to the needs of the rural community as indicated by their tea cards. I can only tell him what I have been doing in regard to my own business. If I put up whatever modicum of paraffin wax candles I get on the counter, the whole week's supply would be gone in ten minutes. The method I adopt is that I give candles to anybody who has a tea card in my shop as nearly as I can in proportion to the number of people on the tea card. Ordinarily, I give two candles per week to whoever is on the tea card—that is, as far as they go. In many cases, that does not permit of everybody who has a tea card getting two candles per week, but at least it does ensure that one person will not get a whole packet while others will have none at all. When I mention the tea card, I should perhaps explain that the system we operate is that when a person registers with us for tea, we give him a card indicating the number of persons in the house who are entitled each to the ¾ oz. of tea. That is ready evidence of the number of persons for whom candles are required.

To-day we are asked in Dáil Eireann by the Minister to say whether we agree with the proposal that he should be invested with power to determine in respect of each individual firm what is a fair profit, and to direct each shopkeeper to surrender to the Exchequer any sum in excess of what he deems to be a fair profit. Outside Bedlam there was never such a proposal. It is daft. Surely, the Minister himself must realise that it is daft. If we do set up in this country a system of ad hoc taxation, you might as well put us all in Maryborough Jail. Every sentence that is imposed by a court of summary jurisdiction takes the form of a fine, or the alternative of six months' imprisonment, but if you are going to give the Minister for Supplies a power of this character to determine what he considers a fair profit for every trader, you might as well give him the power of lettre de cachet and lock us all up for the duration. That kind of “codology” is adumbrated for the purpose of creating the impression that the whole system of price-control is one of infinite complexity, that nobody can understand it, that it is impossible to try, that it is insoluble, and that we must provide the Minister with a scimitar to cut the Gordian knot, and to lay down for the whole community a universally low standard of prices. To anybody engaged in business, that is just all “cod.” This universal standard of prices is all “cod.” It is being attempted for the purpose of creating an impression, and, if possible, of shutting the mouths of the Labour Party. But there is as much chance of any Government enforcing a standstill Order of that kind as there is of my pushing over St. Patrick's Cathedral with my left hand.

How is any man to determine what prices were being charged in French-park for rings for chickens' legs three weeks ago? If you are not in a position to establish what they definitely cost in any shop, how can you enforce the Order at all? That may be an extreme case but what is the use of making Orders the enforcement of which, as regards at least 40 per cent. of their operation, is utterly impossible. The only purpose it serves is to make the law disreputable in the eyes of the people. This business of ordaining a price for a particular commodity is not satisfactory. Take the case of a man who wants to pay a black market price for that commodity and keep within the law, a man such as was described in the Sunday Dispatch last Sunday. He goes and purchases the article at the fixed price, then plays a game of poker with the seller and loses in the course of the game the difference between the fixed price and the black market price of the commodity. I should like to see your price fixer trying to deal with that situation. He would be asked did he ever play poker and, if he did, did he always go while the going was good and leave the winner with the winnings. If not, he should. Price fixation is an extremely difficult matter, we all know. For that reason I tell the Minister regularly every year when this Estimate comes before the House to face that fact and to prepare a limited schedule of commodities of fundamental importance, effectively control their prices and let the rest of the commodities rip because he cannot control them. The most effective way of keeping prices down is to let prices rip to a point where the average citizen will not attempt to buy these commodities— then they become a drug on the market and they will be unloaded quickly enough—or to induce so large a supply, as was done in the case of oats, as to create a surplus on the market. Do Deputies remember the time we controlled the price of oats here? The net result of controlling the price of oats was that there was not a bag of oatmeal to be got in the country. That was a case in which by taking off price control, you could stimulate a supply. I urged on the Minister to take control off the price of oats, and for a long time that proposal was resisted. Eventually, as usual, they gave in and with loud protestatious that I had never mentioned the subject of oats, did exactly as I told them, with the result that, in 12 months, we had a surplus of oatmeal, and at this moment oatmeal millers are running around with their hats in their hands offering to sell oatmeal below the fixed price.

There are certain other commodities in respect of which it is impossible to create a surplus because we are dependent on exterior sources of supply, and no matter what the price trend of them is, it will not evoke substantially increased supplies, though it may precipitate a certain measure of smuggling across the Border. We have to face the fact that supplies of these commodities have virtually ceased and there is no use in trying to ensure that the masses of the people will continue to have them. In so far as they are luxuries, we shall have to make up our minds that people will have to do without them, but now we come to things like clothing, fuel, flour and sugar. Look at sugar. That is a commodity control of which has been taken right from the point of production to the point of sale. Has any Deputy heard of any serious trouble in regard to the average individual getting his sugar at the fixed price? I have not. It is the one commodity which is flowing steadily into consumption at the fixed price and of which everybody is getting the quota to which he is entitled.

Why do you not do that with flour? Why do you not do that with utility clothing? Do Deputies remember the story of the utility shirt? Do they remember when the Minister evolved the brilliant idea that he was going to supply cloth at a subsidised price to a selection of manufacturers and going to determine, at the end of the financial year, whether they had made too much money on the shirt? I came in here and pointed out that the shirt which was costing at that time, I think, 50/- a dozen to produce and put on the delivery wagons was selling in the retail shops in Dublin at 14/6, and was being sold by the wholesalers to the retailers at 10/-. The 4/2 shirt was being distributed by the wholesaler to the retailers at 10/- and by the retailers to the consumer at 14/6. When I drew his attention to it, the Minister said: "I cannot do a ha'porth about it until I see their balance sheets after six months." When he saw them, he had a fit, and it then struck him that it was possible to say to the manufacturer who made the shirt costing 4/2: "We will allow you a shilling on the shirt, the wholesaler a shilling and the retailer two shillings," making the shirt 8/2 and let them fight it out between them as to how they would divide the 4/-. If any wholesaler was fool enough to pay more than the 1/- profit allowed to the manufacturer, or any retailer fool enough to pay more than the 1/- profit allowed to the wholesaler, one thing was certain: the consumer, the man going to wear the shirt, would pay 8/2 and no more.

They are doing that and no reasonable shopkeeper in the country complains in the least. On the contrary, it has been the greatest possible relief to me, as a shopkeeper, to get the shirt in now with the price marked clearly on it, so that no question arises as to whether there is any huggermugger or profiteering. Why is that not done in respect of a range of utility clothing? It has been done in regard to boots, and most excellently, though, if anything, the margin of profit allowed on boots is too big. My experience, however, is that almost invariably the manufacturers stick their fingers in the eye of the Department first. They get away with about 18 months' plunder and after I have "larruped" the Department hard enough for 18 months, they wake up and chew the profits down. They are allowing the boot manufacturers and the boot retailers too wide a margin of profit. I, as a boot retailer, am making and have been making too much money, and the Minister ought to look to that.

The profit margins in the drapery trade are not unduly wide, in my judgment, mainly because the quantity of merchandise available to the drapers has been so drastically reduced, but it is a generous margin of profit as I see it at present. On balance, I think it is not inequitable and if you were materially to reduce it, I think one of the consequences must be a reduction of employment in that end of the distributive trade. I urge the Minister again in regard to flour to take over the industry, to set up a flour-milling board and to operate it on a non-profit basis. In regard to boots and drapery, I think the policy of marking the fixed price as at present is the right policy. The only point is that the Minister should keep under constant review the profit margins allowed. He ought to be able to find in the trade certain individuals who would tell him honestly what their experience of these profit margins is.

Thirdly, I beg of him to disembarrass himself of the effort to control the price of everything. It cannot be done, and it is making the law disreputable in the eyes of the mass of the people, because they know it is not being done, and if you once create a situation in which everybody is breaking the law in some particular, you are preparing a situation in which the bulk of the people will break the law in whatever particular suits them. Unless you can get universal observance of the law, its enforcement becomes practically impossible, and if the law is manifestly absurd, the result is that it gradually loses its sanctity and you find respectable men, who ought to abhor the very thought of breaking the law in any particular, calmly doing it habitually, shrugging their shoulders and saying: "Nobody could abide by the regulations the Department are making at present." In my submission to the House, this arises almost exclusively from the attempt of the Department to regulate the price of everything.

I want now to draw attention to the habit of varying price Orders. Take jam, for instance. The Minister was born a draper, so he is probably not familiar with the trade of the grocer as I am. There are probably 32 varieties of jams. If you do a busy trade, you learn all the prices of jams, and the moment a person asks for blackberry jam you say immediately: "? per 2 lb. pot." Then the Minister changes the prices and makes the price of that jam 1/7½d. per 2 lb. pot, and the next busy day you are very likely to charge a halfpenny too much for that pot of jam in the rush. But you discipline yourself and try to learn off the altered prices. Within a week the whole thing is changed again, and not infrequently, where you have strawberry and apple, raspberry and apple, and a few more jams of that character grouped under one heading, you suddenly find strawberry and apple lifted into another grade, and raspberry and apple left where it was; so that, whereas heretofore strawberry and apple and raspberry and apple were grouped together at 1/11, strawberry and apple now becomes 2/2, and raspberry and apple remains at 1/11, with the result that, with the best intentions in the world, you find individual assistants making a mistake.

It has this double evil: (1) that you have broken the law; and (2) even if you do go for somebody who has made the mistake, you cannot but have the feeling at the back of your head: "But for the grace of God, I would have done it myself." You cannot wax very eloquent about a subordinate's failure if you know in your heart and soul that if you were placed in the same position it is seven chances out of ten you would have done the same yourself. I recognise that you cannot always avoid these changes, but I would suggest that if, in an industry like the jam industry, all those prices are fixed, say, on 1st March, and then they come back on 1st April and say: "We want to make a little amendment to this," the Minister should reply: "No; we will amend them once every three months, but no more. It may mean that if an error has been made in this quarter you will be able to put up a case for adding a halfpenny to the price of jam in the ensuing quarter; but I will not have weekly changes, and you will have to do the best you can." That, of course, applies to a wide range of commodities of that kind, and the point is that frequent changes in price give rise to errors.

I want to say a word with regard to inspectors. I said here in the House and elsewhere once before that I distinguish, in the case of inspectors of the Department of Supplies, between the conduct of some of the young fellows and that of the more experienced men. Some of those people are—it is as well to be plain-spoken and honest about it—desperately unpopular in the country. I fully sympathise with those men on the extremely disagreeable duties they have to perform. No man likes to be going around on an eternal inquisition of the character those men have to conduct, and my experience of meeting the more mature inspectors of the Department of Supplies has been that, if they are treated reasonably and are allowed to believe that the person they are interviewing is desirous of co-operating and of giving them the information it is their duty to collect, they are reasonable men; they have due regard for the exigencies of the business with which they are dealing, and due regard for the nervousness of the merchant who feels he may have got himself into serious trouble either because of his guilty conduct or because he is apprehensive that he has put his foot in it, and in any case they have no desire to insult or irritate him but only to do their duty. But then there is another type of "tulip" who is so intoxicated by the fact that he has become an inspector of the Department of Supplies that it is not beyond him to suspend the conversation by saying: "It is my duty to inform you that anything you say will be taken down in writing and used in evidence against you." Well, the least choleric of men who is doing his best to be civil, and to recognise the difficulties, is liable to lose his temper in those circumstances; he is liable to take a ledger and hurl it at the inspector, and perhaps I had better not mention what one is inclined to say in those circumstances. We all recognise the difficulties the administration have; the Minister ought to recognise the difficulties which a great many people in rural Ireland have as well. I know the case of a woman who, on seeing some inspector of the Department come in—no doubt he had the most benevolent intentions—faded away and did not get up out of her bed for three weeks. I do not think anything the inspector said in that case was responsible, but the very sight of him put the heart across that woman. Cognisance should be had of that, and I strongly urge on the Minister to ensure that, particularly in rural Ireland, the duties of inspection will be done by the seasoned and experienced officers of his Department, even if on occasion it may be necessary to send two men, allowing the junior to do the routine work and the senior to conduct whatever discussions or inquiries it may be the duty of the staff to pursue on an occasion of that kind.

There are two other matters I want to mention. One is the price of pollard. I told you six months ago to bring down the price of pollard. You brought it down from 18/6 to 16/6, but you have not brought it down enough, and if you keep the pollard there it will heat. The mills are packed with it; they cannot sell it, and they will not sell it at the present price. You ought to bring down the price of pollard by 2/- to 4/- a cwt. if you want to pass it into consumption. It is much better to lose a bit of money on the pollard than to have to throw it all out. I have been telling you that for six months. You will bring it down sooner or later, and the sooner you bring it down the sooner you will bring it into consumption. If the price is kept at the present level, the pollard will be suitable for nothing but to be thrown on the dunghill.

The last thing I want to say is this: my experience is that a great deal of the inflated prices we are required to pay at the present time for a variety of commodities coming into this country is due to the freights charged by Irish Shipping, Limited. It is time the Minister showed his hand in regard to this matter. I have tried my level best to get, by inquiry from the Minister or his Department, the facts about Irish Shipping, but I cannot get them. I urge that the freights charged by Irish Shipping constitute a heavy tax on the people of this country, and have been designed to secure the amortisation of the cost of the ships in ten trips. I protest against that, more especially as those immense freight rates are yielding to those who manage the ships a percentage commission for the work they do. If those facts are not correct I ask the Minister to tell Dáil Éireann what the facts are. I have tried by every expedient I could to get the fact officially, to get the truth. I failed; all I have succeeded in collecting so far is a pot-luck rumour. I put that rumour before the House now with the object of giving the Minister an opportunity to confirm or rebut it. Commodities like cornflour, cotton textiles and dried fruit are coming in here, and in many cases the freight rate from Lisbon is four to six times the cost of the merchandise.

That is bad enough, but, when you add to that the fact that those who are charging those freights are getting a percentage commission on them, I say that any man who is managing a ship operating between Lisbon and this country is making a fortune on every individual trip, and those are the gentlemen who are held up to the country as the public-spirited souls who are acting on the board of Irish Shipping without compensation of any kind. It is right that Dáil Eireann should keep in mind what the situation is. It is true that a group of shipping owners in this country are sitting on the board of Irish Shipping Limited without remuneration of any kind, but the system whereby ships are worked by Irish Shipping Limited is that those individual ship owners are asked to manage the ships for Irish Shipping Limited on a commission basis, and I allege that they collect commission on those freights. I urge that those freights are unduly inflated, and I urge that they are largely responsible for the excessive cost of cotton cloth and of a variety of other commodities such as cornflour, which our people, particularly the poor, habituaily use and must use. I ask the Minister to give the House a full statement of what the position of Irish Shipping is, what the freight rates charged by them are, the profits that have been made since the body was established, and most decidedly, a detailed account of the commissions earned by those who have been managing the ships on behalf of Irish Shipping Limited. If the Minister will take some at least of the suggestions I have put before him it will be no longer necessary for him to envisage a situation in which he will become the tax gatherer ad hoc of every business concern in this country, nor will it be necessary for him to beat his bosom in public at frequent intervals and announce that havoc and ruin are upon the country and that he stands alone and unsupported in the gap. We are all aware that the difficulties are considerable, and every section of the community is prepared to help if given honest information on what the situation truly is. The suggestions that I have made would, I believe, contribute greatly to a solution of many of the Minister's problems, and provided he would truly state any other problems that lie ahead, I have no doubt that other Deputies would offer him many suggestions which, if accepted, would prove equally fruitful and desirable in their results.

Mr. Roddy

The Minister gave a comprehensive survey of the work of his Department, and dilated at great length on some of its principal activities. The information he gave was, in many respects, invaluable, although I may be regarded as challenging him on certain details. Before proceeding to deal with the work of the Minister's Department, I would like to refer in some detail to the administration of certain regulations made by the Minister. Some of these regulations are, undoubtedly, irritating to people who have to work hard for a living. When shopkeepers offend against the regulations, they certainly should be prosecuted, but, after all, they are entitled to the same justice as any other section of the community. It appears to me that it should be the aim of the Minister and his Department, especially during this period of emergency, to make it as easy as possible for the people to pursue their ordinary avocations. Sundry prosecutions have been brought against shopkeepers for the most trivial offences. The time of the courts is wasted, and industrious people have to endure prosecutions in relation to matters which are of little or no value to the State, or to the Department of Supplies. It may be argued, and naturally would be argued by the officials of the Department, that the law must be enforced. There is, however, an old maxim which says that "the law takes no notice of trifles."

I have been asked to bring to the notice of the Minister and his Department complaints made by certain people engaged in the tailoring trade. The austerity suit was introduced in Great Britain. Shortly afterwards the Minister curtailed the number of pockets to be inserted in an emergency suit. The British public resented the austerity suit so much that it had to be withdrawn. In this country a number of tailors have been summoned for adding an extra pocket to a suit, or, perhaps, an extra one-eighth of an inch to the length of a trousers. We do not know, of course, what is the amount of inspectorial and legal costs incurred in bringing cases to court, but I imagine it must be fairly substantial. I put it to the Minister: Is it really worth while continuing a restriction of that kind when it has been abandoned in Great Britain? I suggest to him that, perhaps, he could now see his way to relax, or abolish, that restriction altogether; that he might follow the example of Great Britain, and let people have an extra pocket in their coats if they want it, or an extra one-eighth of an inch in the length of a trousers if customers so desire it.

Another matter that I want to bring to the Minister's notice concerns a tailor who, for example, employs two or three assistants. A man in that position has recently been asked by the Department to take out a manufacturer's licence. I understand such a request has been made to other men in a small way of business. This man did not understand what the object was, and he asked me to raise the matter by way of Parliamentary Question. Instead of doing so, I am availing of this opportunity to raise it on the Estimate for the Department. The Minister, I am sure, will be able to give me some information which will satisfy my informant.

So much for the details. I notice that the Estimate for the Minister's Department shows the substantial increase of £784,728 over last year. Half of the increase is represented by the increase in the cost of food subsidies. I assume that was inevitable in present circumstances. I did not hear the Minister's explanation of that item when introducing the Estimate, but I assume the increase is inevitable in view of the circumstances of the time and of the difficulty in procuring food supplies from outside as well as their high cost at the moment. The next largest item in the increase is represented by the cost of the production of turf for use in the non-turf areas. The increase is £131,000. This is the fourth year in which we have been engaged in the production of turf. It appears to me that the costs of turf production are increasing year by year, even though we have had four years' experience of the work. I should imagine that after that experience, turf production should have reached a higher degree of efficiency than we have succeeded in achieving, and that we should have succeeded in bringing down the costs of production. But, evidently, the costs are being added to each year.

I suggested, on a former occasion, that, so long as the county councils are obliged to embark on turf production, the difficulty of bringing down the costs of production will remain, and that it would be advisable, in the interests of economy, if the Minister were to devise some alternative organisation for providing our people with cheaper turf. I admit that, since I made that suggestion, the transport problem has become more difficult, and that other restrictions have added to the uncertainty of the position, but, at all events, after four years' experience, the cost of production is apparently still increasing. In the ordinary and normal course of events one would expect that after the experience the Minister has gained, he ought to be able to bring down the costs of production substantially.

I submit that there is no justification whatever for the present high cost of turf. I admit that the situation this year is abnormal. Last year, when transport conditions were reasonably normal, there was certainly no justification at all for the high price which people had to pay for turf in the City of Dublin and in other non-turf areas. I suggested before that if the Minister could organise a group of private producers—and in my opinion that could be done—he could obtain turf at a much cheaper price than it is possible to obtain it through the instrumentality of the county councils. As a rule, the cost of producing county council turf is from 25 to 50 per cent. higher than that of private producers. In fact, in some cases it is very much higher, but, at all events, there is that big margin of difference. I think that if groups of private producers were organised in the different areas in the country it would be possible for the Minister to obtain much cheaper turf than he is getting at present. I will admit, quite candidly, that this year the position is exceedingly difficult and awkward on account of the transport situation, but, even allowing for that and other difficulties, I still hold it should be possible for the Minister to obtain turf at a lower price than he is getting it through the instrumentality of the county councils.

Deputy Dockrell asked a very pertinent question to-day, and if I recollect arightly he asked the same question last year. The question was: what does it cost to produce a ton of turf and bring it to the City of Dublin? The Minister, I think, gave an approximate figure of the transport costs last year, but, so far as I recollect, he did not answer Deputy Dockrell's question. I know that last year turf was actually sold and delivered to a merchant in a town in the West of Ireland at the low price of 9/- and 10/- a ton, and that it was sold and delivered in other towns in the West at 15/- a ton. I admit that the distance the turf had to be transported was short—up to five or six miles—but, even so, it was sold and delivered at those prices. The merchant who bought it at 9/- and 10/- a ton is quite prepared to show to the Minister, his officials, or anybody else the invoices to prove that. I do not imagine that the price of turf for those towns will be very much higher this year. It will probably be on about the same level as last year. There is something wrong with the whole system of turf production. No serious attempt has been made to bring down the cost of production or the sale price of turf.

The Minister invited the Dáil to express an opinion on the question of price control. Even assuming that one were inclined to express an opinion on it, one would be very reluctant to do so after listening to Deputy Dillon, who is very experienced on this subject and, as a merchant in a very big way of business, has occasion daily to watch and observe prices. I agree with Deputy Norton that it is a subject on which no member of the Dáil could express an opinion, until more information is placed at our disposal than the Minister has given up to the present.

I admit at once that, in regard to price control in this country, we are in an entirely different position from the people in Great Britain, where prices are fixed for all the products and goods of the country and where they are regulated from the moment they are produced until they are consumed. Because of that difference, it is very hard to operate an effective system of price control here. Whether the Minister has been wise in pegging prices down to the May level, or whether he has done an injustice to some manufacturers, I am not in a position to say. I must refrain from expressing an opinion until I have more information than the Minister has given up to the present.

There are very general complaints throughout the country about high prices for all classes of commodities, many of which were mentioned by previous speakers. The prices seem to be out of all relation to what should be the cost of production or manufacture. I do not know what happens to the intervening margins, but even Deputy Dillon himself has admitted that the prices he is charging for certain articles in his own shop—prices which have been fixed by the Minister—are excessive. He confessed that he was making an excessive profit on some of those articles; so seemingly even the officials of the Department, notwithstanding three or four years' experience in price fixing, are not yet absolutely proficient in that business.

I have been asked to bring the question of butter coupons to the notice of the Minister. Some retailers complain because they are obliged to return butter coupons in exactly the same way as sugar coupons. They think butter coupons should be dealt with in the same way as tea coupons—that the people engaged in the sale should be allowed to retain them. They have a grievance on that particular score and I would like the Minister to look into it at his leisure.

I have also been asked to raise the question of domestic lighting. I know it is difficult for the Minister to give any indication as to the prospects regarding supplies of paraffin and candles during the coming winter. Some traders down the country are naturally anxious to know the Minister's outlook on the matter, as their customers are already making anxious inquiries from them and they are not in a position to give any definite information. It would be advisable if, in view of the anxiety and perturbation that exist in the country, the Minister would make a statement on the subject, holding out some hope of a reasonable supply of paraffin and candles—even of a more plentiful supply than during the late months of last spring.

Deputy Dillon raised the question of freight charges. It is a subject about which I know very little, though I have had some experience of the abnormal freights charged by Irish ships. The freights are almost as high as the cost of the commodities imported. I intended to make inquiries from other sources as to why the freights were so high. I was asked some time ago by certain traders down the country to raise this question, but I had not an opportunity of getting in touch with any of the Minister's officials. If I had had that opportunity, probably I would not have raised the matter here now. However, as it has been raised publicly by Deputy Dillon I will await with interest the Minister's explanation for what appear to be excessively high freights.

Mr. Cogan

Having regard to the fuel situation, it is of interest to note, in this Book of Estimates, that the only reduction in any particular branch of the Department is the reduction in the provision for camps for turf workers. I think £28,000 was provided for this purpose last year, while it is only £1,000 for the current year. I was not present for the Minister's opening statement and do not know if he explained the position. There may be some insurmountable difficulty in regard to the provision of accommodation for turf workers. Any approach to the question of increasing turf production lies in the provision of accommodation for the workers as near as possible to the bogs. A big effort should be made to overcome any difficulties that may arise. I have had experience of the difficulty of bringing men long distances to work. There is a variety of problems arising —the expense of conveying them by lorry, their having very little time to rest and their having to be up and on the road at a very early hour in the morning. Every possible effort should be made to provide accommodation for them at the scene of their work. This is, I think, the only outstanding reduction in the present Estimate, and I am calling the Minister's attention to it in regard to planning for future supplies, so that he may do whatever he finds possible and overcome whatever difficulties may arise.

There is grave dissatisfaction in regard to the manner in which the distribution of essential supplies is regulated and the manner in which the Department's regulations are enforced. Every Deputy is familiar with these difficulties. We have cases of small retailers and producers—such as bakers—having to keep very complicated records and finding it almost impossible to keep those records according to the desire of the Department.

I agree whole-heartedly with Deputy Dillon, that not only should the regulations be made as clear as possible for the officials enforcing them, but they should have regard to the difficulties under which ordinary citizens labour. I know that in every branch of business with which the Department has to deal considerable efforts are made to outwit the officials and to evade the regulations.

In that respect I have sympathy with the Minister's difficulties. One example which is familiar to all Deputies is that which occurred some years ago regarding supplies of sugar for jam making, when practically every citizen appeared to be engaged extensively in jam production. On that occasion I think there was something wrong in the approach of the Department to the situation. It should be obvious to the Department, when it was possible to obtain sugar simply by filling in a form, that numbers of people would endeavour to obtain it in that way. Now that the supply of sugar for jam making has been cut off a certain number of people will suffer a grave injustice. I refer to those who have fairly extensive fruit gardens, in which supplies of fruit are apparently allowed to go to waste when sugar is not available. It should be easy to allocate a certain amount of sugar to people who can prove that they have fruit trees. I know that it would be physically impossible to allocate supplies of sugar fairly amongst people who might claim that they were going to purchase fruit for jam making, but those with a certain minimum amount of fruit in their gardens are certainly entitled to consideration if it is possible to make sugar available. That is particularly desirable this season, having regard to the fact that supplies of butter are very low and that other foodstuffs will be difficult to obtain later on. It is wholly undesirable that perishable fruit should be allowed to be wasted and for that reason, some regulation might be made to provide a minimum amount of sugar for those who have fruit trees.

I fully agree with what Deputy Corry said, that the prospect of sugar supplies this year is not too bright. There is no doubt that a large percentage of the acreage under sugar beet had to be ploughed up, or, if not ploughed up, is in a very precarious position owing to the prolonged drought. That statement applies not only to sugar beet, but to other important crops. To a certain extent it applies to the wheat crop. In considering the supply position for the coming year the Minister will have to have regard to the fact that the supply of home-grown wheat and other grain crops, and also potatoes may not be as good as we would have anticipated from the acreage sown. We have gone through an exceptional year so far as climatic conditions go. I was interested to hear Deputy Dillon speak of the wastage of electric power by having public lighting in small towns at night, when there is hardly any public need for such lighting. That is one of the inconsistencies which prevail in regard to supplies of electricity. While we have the Department of Suplies appealing feverishly to the public to conserve supplies, in many directions there is wilful public waste. We should set an example by avoiding waste in every possible way. I find it very hard to understand how some of the regulations made by the Department can be justified. I have the deepest sympathy with traders and others engaged in the distribution of supplies in their endeavours to comply with these regulations. That fact was brought to my notice in regard to fixing the price of shoeing iron and iron for cars. An Order was made last March fixing the price at 83/- per cwt., but in May the price was reduced to 76/- per cwt. Merchants who had laid in considerable supplies of iron for the purpose of meeting demands for such essential supplies in their districts found that they had to sell at a reduced price, thus suffering the loss entailed by the reduction in price.

I think it is wrong to penalise retailers for endeavouring to obtain supplies for their customers by reducing the price without, at the same time, making provision for some rebate in respect of supplies which the retailers may have in hand. That kind of regulation tends to discourage merchants from endeavouring to satisfy the needs of their customers, and from obtaining the supplies that their customers demand. It is wrong to impose a penalty of that kind upon any section of the community, no matter what business they may be engaged in.

A company engaged in the marketing of turf found that, although they were compelled to draw the turf 10 miles— which would mean travelling 20 miles on the double journey—they were allowed only a halfpenny per ton per mile for the drawing of that turf. That is to say, there was a margin of only 10d. per ton between the price they had to pay for the turf and the price which they could charge. Regulations of this kind, which impose penalties and restrict ordinary business, do not serve any useful purpose and it is desirable that the Minister for Supplies should get reliable information in every area as to the actual conditions under which the people are working before taking action. In regard to that question of turf, the Minister may not have known the exact position from which the turf had to be drawn or the exact distance and a sufficient margin was not, therefore, allowed. It is essential that the Minister should be correctly informed before imposing restrictions of this kind, which have the effect of curtailing business and, in many cases, restricting the amount of goods available to consumers in a particular district.

I agree with the suggestion that something radical and far-reaching should be done in regard to the control of prices so as to prevent undue profits being made. Suggestions have been made from different parts of the House and the Minister has invited the views of Deputies in regard to a proposal which he put up himself for instituting a flexible system of taxation for what he called "excess profits." If there is to be a system by which the different firms engaged in the same line of production will be affected, we should have regard to a matter which has come under my notice. I have been informed that the large flour millers have made very large profits, based upon the price fixed for flour. As against that, I have been told that some of the smaller millers have not been able to make very large profits. There is, therefore, a position of difficulty to be met so as to provide a margin which would be fair to the small producer and which, at the same time, would not be excessive to the larger producer, whose overhead costs are lower than those of the small producer. The Minister's proposal to levy taxation as he thinks fit would hardly commend itself to this House or to the country generally. Already, we have found that, whenever the Minister was given far-reaching powers, they were used in a manner which inflicted very grave hardship on people endeavouring to carry on their business honestly, fairly and in the best interests of the community. I do not think that this House would welcome any increase or extension of the Minister's power in regard to the imposition of a levy on profits.

There is no doubt that, so far as some essential requirements are concerned, such as clothing and boots— particularly children's boots—prices have become almost prohibitive. Not only that but the quality of the goods has become so inferior that they are hardly worth purchasing at all. In this respect, the poorer sections of the community are finding life more and more difficult. It should be possible to make out a list of goods which are absolute necessaries of life and to fix a price for such goods which it would be possible for the mass of the people to pay. As an example, I mention boots for children and strong boots for farmers and workmen—agricultural workers and other manual workers— who are exceptionally heavy on footwear. I think that a special effort should be made to keep the prices of these commodities at a low level. There is no doubt that men who have to go out in all kinds of weather to work in the bogs or on the land, particularly in the winter time, should have good boots. Their very lives depend on having boots capable of keeping out the water. I think whatever sacrifices have to be made, even if it were necessary to increase the price of some other commodity, we should keep the price of those essential commodities as low as possible so that the people who are engaged in important national work should be properly shod. Again, children who have to travel to school in all kinds of weather should be assured of boots at a reasonable price and of a reasonably good quality.

I want to refer now to rubber boots. It is known that supplies of rubber are very low, but certain things, such as tyres, are still available, and if any rubber can be made available a certain amount should be allocated for the manufacture of rubber boots which should be distributed to those doing work of a nature which demands such footwear—workers, for example, engaged in drainage work in the winter months and workers on the land. A certain percentage of the workers on the land should be assured of rubber boots, if they can be made available.

I had this matter brought very forcibly to my notice by a farmer engaged extensively in wheat production. During the past year this farmer produced 1,000 barrels of wheat. When I called to his place he and his sons and workers were carting manure. It was in the winter months, and they were top-dressing the land with the manure for winter wheat and beet. The men were sinking six or eight inches in the ground while they were taking the manure from the heap. The farmer put it to me that if supplies of rubber could be made available from any source, workers such as his were entitled to such footwear as would give them ample protection. The ordinary boots provided are not suitable for men engaged in such work. That is only one example of the needs of people who are serving the best interests of the country during this emergency.

We must also consider the position of farmers and farm workers in regard to tea and sugar supplies. Here we have a problem which is very difficult to solve. It is the problem of farm workers who are partly boarded by the farmer and partly boarded in their own homes, inasmuch as they must have one meal each day in their own homes and three meals on Sundays. In many cases those workers object to handing over their coupons to the farmer who is boarding them. The farmer, on the other hand, cannot provide them with tea or sugar out of the limited ration he obtains for his own family, although many farmers endeavour to do so. That is a very difficult problem. The Minister may suggest that the problem could be met by the farmer insisting on the men boarding themselves in their own home, but there are difficulties in the way there. In some parts of the country it is not the custom, and in other parts of the country the men could not do it, because they have to travel a long way to their work.

Then we have to consider the position of casual workers employed just for the harvest operations. They could not be expected to supply coupons for the farmers. So far as they are concerned, a special allowance should be made. The allowance should be given to each farmer for harvesting operations, and it could be based on the acreage of cereal crops. It might be a small scale allowance, but no matter how small, it would be welcome. I believe that suggestion is deserving of consideration because it would meet cases of real hardship.

Mr. Allen

In my constituency there is no turf available, but almost every day in the week people see train loads of timber leaving different parts of County Wexford on the way to Dublin. I know that Dublin people have very little fuel, but the people in the towns in Wexford, and in the country districts as well, cannot see why timber should be taken every day in the week from the State forests in Wexford and brought to Dublin. The farmers in Wexford complain that they cannot get fuel for threshing or any other purpose. I must ask the Minister seriously to consider putting a stop to the export of timber out of a county like Wexford where there is no turf. Any turf that is burned there has to be brought from Kerry or Donegal, and there is no reason why timber suitable only for fuel should be taken out of the county. I have brought the matter to the Minister's notice on several occasions, but nothing has been done about it.

We are likely to have a more serious state of affairs in the coming winter so far as fuel is concerned. That serious position confronts both urban and rural areas. In those circumstances, there is no reason why the Wexford timber should be taken out in such large quantities for a Dublin destination. We have no objection to the Dublin people getting a fuel supply, but we feel that it should be got from some other parts of the country.

There was a lot of talk here to-day about turf. I would like to suggest how it might be possible to handle the turf more efficiently and cheaply. The turf that is transported from the different turf-producing areas should go direct to the fuel merchants' yards. At the present time all the turf brought into County Wexford has to be conveyed to the fuel dump and afterwards carted in small lots to the fuel merchants' yards. I think the Minister should make an Order compelling these fuel merchants to take the turf direct from the railway station or from the lorry into their yards, if they have accommodation, and to store it in their yards. Many of them, to my knowledge, have large sheds which formerly they used for the storage of coal, and, for some reason or other that I cannot understand, they consistently refuse to store more than a ton or two of turf. We hear complaints, which are justified in many cases, that during the winter months people are getting wet turf. The turf must be wet if in very wet weather small lots of turf are taken out of the fuel dumps and delivered around to the different houses in the towns.

That is the main reason why there is so much wet turf and so many complaints in winter about wet turf. The fuel merchants should be compelled to take this turf and to provide storage and cover for it. They must have a certain profit out of handling turf and delivering it to their customers around the different towns. I see no adequate reason why they should not be compelled to bring it, in the first instance, into their stores and keep it under cover until it is needed. I believe there is a certain additional allowance for doing that. I do not know whether the allowance is sufficient or not, but for whatever reason, the same thing has gone on for three years and people are talking about it and wondering why the Minister for Supplies, when he is doing such good work, does not see his way to do this. I think he knows all about it and I hope that he will again consider the matter and compel these fuel merchants to store the turf. A great number of them are not at all inclined to handle the turf at all and would not handle it were it not for the fact that they cannot get coal. They have handled coal all their lives and they are hostile to turf. I know of a case in Wexford where the turf merchants had not three days' supply of turf in their yards. Great hardship would be caused in these towns if a snow-storm should occur. The turf dumps are a mile or two outside the town and the turf could not possibly be got in. These merchants had any amount of accommodation in their yards but they refused point blank, to my own knowledge, to take turf from the railway station and bring it to their yards. It could be delivered by the turf board during the summer months. I mentioned this matter before and I hope I will not have to refer to it again because it is an outstanding scandal that this is not insisted upon.

I wish to bring to the Minister's notice the question of the provision of steel milk cans used by farmers for the delivery of milk to creameries and railway stations. There is a great shortage of these steel cans. I know that it is almost impossible to get them but I would suggest to the Minister that he did receive some cream separators from Sweden during the past year and that it might be possible, in the coming harvest, to get some steel milk cans from Sweden instead of the cream separators. Farmers are finding it difficult to get any receptacles for conveying their milk to the creameries and if that were allowed to continue much longer there might be a great wastage of milk because it could not be conveyed to the cities or towns or creameries. I hope something may be done about that matter.

There is also the question of the supply of nuts and bolts. I think there is a factory in Limerick that manufactured nuts and bolts. At present there is a great shortage of nuts and bolts used in farm machinery. Farmers find it absolutely impossible to get nuts or bolts to repair their farm machinery. The hardware merchants have no stocks of them. They are not available in the country. If the Minister could make a supply of iron available to this factory in Limerick that formerly manufactured nuts and bolts, it would be a good thing. They are needed immediately.

There is also the question of leather for the repair of boots. Some short time ago new regulations were made by the Department of Supplies with regard to the distribution of sole leather for repairs. They do not seem to be working properly. There is still a number of small boot repairers over the country who cannot get leather. The larger merchants are not compelled to issue a ration to all their previous customers. There are boot repairers who are not getting their full supplies and I am told that there is some black marketing in leather. I hope that something will be done to give each person engaged in boot repairing a ration. They are all entitled to live. In some cases the families have been repairing boots for generations, and some of them cannot get any leather, especially sole leather. It does not apply generally but it applies to a number, especially the smaller boot repairers. It is no use leaving it to the wholesale merchant to act fairly with every one of them. To my own knowledge they are not doing it.

On the question of electricity a Deputy mentioned that in the smaller towns electricity was still being used all night. That is true. There is a number of pilot lights kept going in some small towns all night. There seems to be no reason in the world why electricity should be used all night in small towns. There are no motor cars on the roads. There is an adequate Civic Guard force to protect the population of these towns and there seems to be no reason why the pilot lights should be kept burning all night. With the long summer days and short nights, they could easily do without any lights but I have seen them burning from 10 at night until 4 or 5 or 6 o'clock in the morning. A lot of electricity could be saved in that direction.

The criticism of the Department of Supplies is, I think, in many directions unjustified. I often wonder what the country would do if we had not a Department of Supplies. I am sure that if we had not that Department during the last four years we would have had many revolutions in the country. We could not have carried on without the Department of Supplies. I must say, to the credit of the Department of Supplies and of the officers, that they have worked very hard. I often marvel, and I think many other Deputies marvel, as to how they got through the intricate work and built up the machinery that they have built up over the last few years. Were it not for the efficient staffs that there are in that Department, certainly the country would be much worse off and, instead of having small difficulties in some directions, we would have serious difficulties. Taking the Department as a whole, they have given marvellous service to the community. I think no other Department of State has, since the emergency, given anything like the service the Department of Supplies has given and are continuing to give. They may annoy people sometimes but, taking them on the whole, they have given great service to the rank and file of the community. Merchants complain because they are visited by inspectors. Other people complain because they cannot get something they want. They blame the Department of Supplies. I suppose it is well to have someone to blame. The Department has developed a thick skin by now as a result of all the abuse that has been showered on them over the last few years. No matter what goes short, no matter what goes wrong, the Minister for Supplies is blamed. From the opposite benches, the Minister was blamed because he did not bring in coal in 1937 or 1938, or something like that. The Phoenix Park, or ten Phoenix Parks, would not have held all the coal that would have been needed to supply the country in the last five years. It is nonsensical to talk at this stage, after five years of war, about scarcity of coal.

The beet crop this year is not very promising and it looks as if next year's supply of sugar will be only 50 per cent. of a normal year's supply. The Minister will not be able to give Deputy Cogan's constituents any sugar for jam, because he will not have it. I think that the people are satisfied to do without sugar for jam making. If they can get it, well and good, but I do not think they can get it. I do not see any hope of any sugar being made available for jam out of this year's supply. I hope that the Minister will give some attention to the question which I raised with regard to timber being transported by rail, supplemented by lorries, out of County Wexford where we have no turf of our own and little or no timber fuel. I hope that will not happen again.

It is up to Deputies to defend the Department and tell the people when a thing is in short supply that it must be rationed and that the difficulties have to be put up with. Generally speaking, we find that the people understand these things. We will always, of course, have a few grousers but, generally speaking, the people have accepted the position. It is my experience, from mixing with all sections of the people, that you will find more grousers in this House than amongst the rank and file of the people; that you will find Deputies trying to manufacture grievances.

Mr. Cosgrave

I suppose you did a bit yourself.

Mr. Allen

Very often, Deputies create trouble in their own constituency by telling the people that the Government are to blame when this, that or the other article is not available. I am sure people have learned their lesson by now and know that the Department of Supplies are doing their best to distribute what is available equitably amongst all sections of the community.

Captain Giles

I agree with Deputy Allen that a Department of Supplies is very necessary during a war period, but a "Department of No Supplies" is of very little use, and I think we can apply that description to the present Department of Supplies. There is another source of supply which, to my mind, is of far more importance to the community unfortunately, and that is the black market. The black market supplies everything. Whether it is tea, soap, tobacco, or anything else, you will get it at a huge price in the black market. I agree that the Department of Supplies has many difficulties to contend with and has eased the situation in many ways, but it has definitely failed to control supplies. As I have said, supplies of tobacco, tea, tyres, candles, soap, and other essentials can be got practically in every village and town but at a price almost beyond what the people are able to pay. They have to pay it, however, or do without the articles and they cannot do without them. Therefore, I say that the Department of Supplies has failed.

There is no reason why the Department could not put through the ordinary trade channels those commodities which are to be got in the black market. There is no use in blaming the people on the Border for supplying the black market. The supplies come directly from Dublin. The stuff is coming across and being manufactured in Dublin, but it is not going through the wholesalers to the small retailers in the country. A small quantity is given to the small shopkeepers throughout the country in order to keep them quiet. But the vast bulk of the commodities is being sold direct to the black market by the wholesalers in Dublin, and I am not a bit afraid to say that. Lorries come down from Dublin to distribute the stuff. The people are being fleeced and the Department is not doing its duty. In every country during a scarcity there is such a thing as a black market for a year or two but, after four or five years, the Department should have curbed this. Racketeers are fleecing the public and lining their own pockets. That should not be tolerated in a Christian country. The Department has not done its duty and it is not doing it to-day. At the same time, the Department has thousands of officials all over the country going into the ordinary decent traders, who always carried on business honestly, and causing them endless trouble. In the same villages and towns you will find racketeers who are carrying on this dirty practice in an open manner and the officials passing them by or, if they visit them occasionally, they never seem to be able to catch them. Even three or four hours after the visit of such an official you can get all the commodities you want, whether tyres, soap, candles or anything else. I think there is something wrong when these officials can call to these places and cannot find the stuff and the ordinary country "mug" can get the articles three or four hours afterwards. I think there are some officials who are not doing their duty and I should like to see the officials doing their duty honestly. I should like to see the racketeers put behind prison bars, not for a year or two, but for five or ten years, because they are nothing more than barefaced robbers. They are fleecing the public and getting away with it. I think the Minister should tighten things up. I do not know whether black marketing is rife all over the country. It may be because I live near Dublin but, so far as I can see, it is just as rife to-day as it was two years ago and something should be done about it. One of the greatest grievances in country districts is that men who have to travel long distances to work on bogs and in other places cannot get bicycle tyres. If they do get them, it is only after waiting for months and months, and then they only get a cheap kind of tyre at a big price. In most cases they have to buy them in the black market.

I should like to know from the Minister if it is true that we are exporting to Great Britain a fairly large quantity of motor and bicycle tyres manufactured here. I have not the slightest objection to that happening so long as we are able to get necessary commodities from Great Britain in return. But I should like the Minister to state whether we are exporting motor and bicycle tyres or have been exporting them during the past year. I have it on first-rate authority that many of the large stores in Great Britain are handling a large quantity of bicycle and motor tyres which were made here. I have it from men who came home from that country and who have been engaged in handling them. I should like to have that cleared up and to know from the Minister whether we are exporting them or not. I have no objection, if Great Britain gives us some of the necessaries of life, to giving her in return something that she needs. But I ask the Minister to be straight and fair with the people. If we are exporting stuff to Great Britain, why not say so? Do not do it in an underhand way. Do not pretend that we would not help Great Britain during the war while, at the same time, we are exporting motor and bicycles tyres that we need at home. I should like to clear this up now and not wait until after the war, when it will be too late. I should also like to know if we are exporting sugar. It is my firm belief that we are exporting fairly large quantities of sugar. As I said, I have no objection, but it should be done over and above board.

I am not at all satisfied with the price being charged for boots and clothing. The price charged for boots is certainly disgraceful. Before the war you could buy a pair of boots for 10/- or 12/- which would last for three years. At present you have to pay from 35/- to £2 for a pair of boots and they will not last for three months. The same thing applies to clothes. Four years ago you could buy a good suit for £3 10s. At present you have to pay from £12 to £15 for a very much inferior suit. Something should be done to curb that. I should also like to raise the question of petrol for Deputies. I am convinced that there is a fair amount of petrol here, and it is very unfair to Deputies, who have been elected by the people to do their work, not to be allowed petrol.

I see no earthly reason why a Deputy, who is the representative of a vast number of people in this House, should not be allowed at least eight gallons of petrol a month to enable him to travel through his constituency and see the people he represents and help them in their difficulties. I think it is most unfair that Deputies elected by the people to this House should have their cars locked up because they cannot get petrol, when they can see Army lorries, from Cork to Donegal, doing no work at all, so far as anybody can see, and sometimes with only one soldier sitting in them, being supplied with seemingly unlimited petrol. Petrol seems to be pumped into these Army lorries without any regard for the scarcity that we are told exists, and, as I say, you will see these Army lorries being driven through the country with, sometimes, only one soldier in the lorry. I suggest that there is as much petrol wasted in two days by these Army lorries as would keep a Deputy of this House supplied for 12 months. I think that we, as the representatives of the people, are entitled to at least eight gallons of petrol a month, and I think it is the duty of the Minister, now that a fair amount of petrol is coming in, to see that we are supplied with at least that much, because I believe we are entitled to it.

There are several other things to which I have strong objection in connection with this matter of supplies, but everybody in the House seems to have been lulled into a state of quietude here to-day. It would appear that they do not want to say things that might hurt, but it is the things that hurt that are generally the best, if one wants anything to be done. I think the Minister himself will agree that he is well able to face any hurtful comment that may be made on him or his Department, and so, so far as I can see, hurtful remarks simply roll off the Minister like water off a duck's back. Take the matter of the supply of anthracite, which affects many people in this country at the present moment. I, myself, for instance, at great expense, put in an anthracite-burning cooker and sealed off my fireplace, but the supply of anthracite is now cut off and I have no means of cooking. I do not suppose there are so very many anthracite-burning cookers installed in this country, and surely there ought to be enough anthracite in the country to keep these few hundreds of anthracite-burning cookers going. Many people installed these cookers at great expense, and now find that they cannot get fuel for them. I think that we should get more consideration in that regard.

In general, it appears to me that too much bluff has been carried on in this country during the last four or five years. I think that the Minister for Supplies is the most politically suited Minister for that Department who could be suggested for it, because he can always get up, not in this House, but in a Fianna Fáil club and make a very doleful speech, saying that we have no coal, no anthracite, or anything else, and get away with it, and then, in a few days after the Minister's statement at the meeting of some Fianna Fáil club, we find that the situation is not half as bad as he made it out to be. It is my belief that all that kind of thing was designed with the object of showing what wonderful men the members of the Fianna Fáil Party were: that they were up to their eyes in trouble, that no supplies could be got, and that if we had not this wonderful man, Deputy Seán Lemass, as Minister for Supplies, the country would be damned and ruined entirely. For instance, we were told at one time that there was no more coal to come from England, but shortly afterwards we found out that the same amount of coal was coming in from England as before, and when the Minister was asked about that he simply smiled. You had the same position in connection with petrol.

I say that England is giving us a decent return for the goods we are sending to her, and I think that it will be found that, considering all the circumstances, our neighbour across the water has been more than generous to us. She has given employment to the many thousands of our people who went over there because they could not get employment at home, and has given them good wages, which they could not get here, and a proportion of which they are sending home to keep their people. Of course, we dare not say these things because, we are told, they are politically and nationally wrong. All that kind of stuff should stop. Let us give credit where credit is due. Our neighbour across the water is meeting us more than half way, and I think we ought to admit it, but of course Fianna Fáil must always be trying to fool the people, and mostly the people who have to live on doles and sops. The people are constantly being told that had it not been for three or four people in this country we could never have kept up our supplies: that these three or four people shook their fists at John Bull and he trembled, whereas the actual fact is that had it not been for John Bull this country would not be where it is to-day, and I defy contradiction on that.

Mr. Kennedy

When Deputy Dockrell was speaking he asked where we would get supplies after the war, what means we would have of getting them, or whether any country would give us any credit. I wish to refer him to his paper, the Irish Times, which quoted, some time ago, the London Economist,, which said that after the war we would be one of the few creditor countries in the world, and it gloated and was proud of the fact that we would be one of the few creditor countries in the world. Another question the Deputy asked was what would we do with our bogs after the war. Now, I have another aspect of the bog situation to put to the Minister, so far as my own constituency is concerned. In County Meath there is not enough bog land to supply the needs of that county, but the county council is cutting away there and, if they keep on cutting and if the war should last much longer, it will mean that there will be no bogs left there at all. Even in Westmeath, which is able to supply its own requirements of turf, if the war should last too long we will arrive at the position where that county will not be able to supply its own requirements in regard to turf. I suggest that in those areas where turbary is getting scarce there should be an immediate shutdown, if we are to look to the future, on the production of national turf, and that those bogs, where the area is small, should be left for private use and development. For instance, there is a bog in the parish of Streete at a place called Inny Junction, which is only about 15 acres in extent. To some people that might appear to be a vast area, but I understand that it is proposed to put a settlement there of people for the purpose of cutting national turf. I am not objecting to that, but I think that experience will show that if the war should last for another couple of years that bog will be done away with in no time.

I am not one of those who subscribe to the notion that we have vast and unlimited quantities of turf in this country, sufficient to provide all our fuel requirements, to supply electricity, and so on. I do not subscribe to that idea at all. We are living under emergency conditions at the moment, but emergencies will arise again, and the Government should endeavour to preserve those bogs with a view to future emergencies, and have some national policy of importing all the coal we can get the moment the war is over.

Mr. Corish

I want to take advantage of this debate to draw the attention of the Minister to one particular matter. Recently, I think, a drive was made by the Department of Supplies to take certain small caterers off the list of people who have been receiving tea and sugar for the last five years, and as a result of that, in my constituency at least, certain caterers have been harshly dealt with. The Minister's Department recently sent out forms asking that certain data as to their supplies of tea or sugar, going back to 1941 or 1942—I forget the exact date—should be furnished by these people, and because they were not able to state the amount of tea or sugar that they were receiving at that basic period, they were cut off from their supplies. When protests were made, the answer of the Minister was that they should supply an auditor's report. Now, I suggest that in the circumstances of these people that is absolutely Gilbertian. The idea of asking small caterers in a small town or village to supply the Minister with an auditor's report of the amount of tea and sugar that they got at a basic period, going back to two or three years ago, is ridiculous. Some of these people do not know what an auditor is. They never had an auditor in their places in their lives. There was really no necessity for them to have an auditor.

In a great many cases these people paid cash down for the tea and sugar they bought during the basic year and I think the Minister should accept their word for it. In many cases the word of the person from whom they bought the goods was submitted, but the Department refused to accept it. I would ask the Minister to reconsider these cases. I do not want to mention the names of individuals in this House, but certain names have been submitted to me of people whom I know and who have been carrying on the business of catering for a very long period. There is one case of a lady in the village of Camolin in County Wexford. She is the only caterer in the village. Two or three fairs are held in that particular area during the month and at the present moment there is nobody in a position to cater for the people attending these fairs. I could quote another case from Blackwater and various other cases. I would ask the Minister not to be so drastic in the application of regulations in cases like that. Surely it is too much to ask persons such as these to supply an auditor's report. They never had access to an auditor in their lives.

I should also like to ask the Minister what steps, if any, the Department takes to secure that farm labourers and road workers get cycle tyres. We heard a great deal from time to time about the importance of farmers and farm labourers during the last five years. Everybody in this House and outside it recognises the importance of the farmer and the farm labourer during the present emergency but, at the same time, he seems to be neglected in so far as the supply of cycle tyres is concerned. Those who have access to country constituencies hear complaints day after day about the difficulty farm labourers and road workers experience in securing tyres. I would suggest to the Minister that he should provide some means whereby a certain number of tyres would be allocated specially and definitely for road workers and farm labourers in each county. Deputy Giles referred to the black market, but I do not think the black market is confined to Dublin. We have a black market in various places. One hears that tyres, tea, sugar and commodities of that kind can be procured at a very high price. One hears that tea is available at 15/- or 20/- per lb. I suggest to the Minister that, after four and a half years of war, his inspectors at this stage should surely be able to lay their hands on people who indulge in blackmarketing.

Last year Deputy Norton put down a question relating to the manufacture and export of powdered milk. I should like to ask the Minister if powdered milk is still being manufactured and exported. If so, I think the Minister should take steps to stop it, because everybody familiar with conditions in the country knows that the drought which we have now for a considerable time has been responsible for a reduction in the milk yield. It is expected that there will be a shortage of butter next year in consequence of that. I would suggest to the Minister that now is the time to conserve all the butter possible in order that people may not be without butter during the winter. It would be a very peculiar state of affairs if we persisted in manufacturing and exporting powdered milk when there is a scarcity and there will be a scarcity of milk and of butter in the coming winter. I ask the Minister now if powdered milk is still being manufactured and exported, that steps should be taken to prevent it so that people may have a decent supply of butter during the coming winter.

Mr. Cosgrave

There are a few matters to which I want to direct the Minister's attention but, before doing so, I should like to refer to a previous debate in which a Deputy raised the question of the Secretary of the Department of Supplies being closely connected with a company. On that occasion I raised the question of the propriety of civil servants being placed in the position of directors of certain State companies. Unfortunately, I might have conveyed the impression that I wished to criticise the present Secretary of the Department of Supplies. I should like to make it perfectly clear now that that was not my intention, and that I know of no public servant who has a better record or who has given more distinguished or unselfish service to the country than the present Secretary of the Department. On that particular occasion, due to the atmosphere which prevailed, it might have been assumed that I agreed with the particular Deputy who brought the matter up. I should like to say definitely now that I have the highest respect and esteem, and always have had, for the Secretary of the Department of Supplies.

There are a few points in connection with the fuel situation which I should like to bring to the Minister's notice particularly in connection with certain villages and towns in County Dublin. In a number of these villages and towns some of the inhabitants at week-ends or during the hours in which they are not engaged at their ordinary work, cut turf either individually or with their neighbours. While that is a highly desirable activity, a large number of other people are not able to devote the necessary time at the week-ends or during the week to the production of fuel. Old people particularly are unable to go to the bogs even if the bog is in close proximity to their homes and, if they were able to go to the bog, they would be incapable of such laborious work. I should like the Minister and the Department to take steps to ensure that these towns and villages will not be left without fuel in the coming winter.

I mentioned the case of one town here before and it was brought to my notice again last week, namely Lucan. While I explained to these people that there seemed to be some valid reason for the arrangement, the people there are unconvinced that there is not waste involved in transporting turf through the town into Dublin. There are a number of villages also in which small industries are carried on and the people engaged in these industries are not able themselves to produce fuel at the week-end or during the week, with the result that in the coming winter they face acute hardship unless sufficient turf or other fuel is made available. The agricultural labourer or person living outside a village is able to secure fuel through cutting timber or getting a small allowance from the farmer for whom he works, but small groups of people who are engaged in certain industrial work are unable to devote the time necessary or to secure transport to the bogs, and I should like to impress on the Minister the desirability of ensuring that sufficient fuel is available for such people.

Another point in connection with turf production which appears to have been overlooked until recently, and in respect of which there is even at the moment dissatisfaction, so far as the bogs around Dublin are concerned, is the provision of suitable roads, both main and side-roads, into the bogs to enable the turf to be brought out. These roads for the most part have been neglected and, in numerous cases, are merely paths. Many people who are producing turf have serious difficulty in getting to the bogs, and having gone to trouble to help the community by producing turf for their own, and possibly their friends', needs, I think some facilities ought to be afforded them, so that they can transport the turf with the least possible difficulty from the bog to the roadside or loading bank, so that the production of turf will be made easier for them and a drive for greater production facilitated, because these people waste considerable time and energy transporting the turf from the bog to the loading bank, due to the state of the roads.

A number of traders have come to me in connection with the distribution of sweets. They have considerable difficulty in getting sufficient sweets from the wholesalers, and, as sweets are not rationed, they have no method of compelling the wholesalers to give them what they consider a fair proportion of their pre-war or earlier years' allowances. Some steps should be taken to ensure that wholesalers are prevented from going into the business of selling sweets as retailers, as a number of these wholesalers have done, or, at any rate, to ensure that, before they do so, sufficient quantities are made available for people whose sole livelihood is the retailing of sweets or who were in business prior to the emergency.

Deputy Corish mentioned the matter, which was also brought to my notice, of sugar supplies to small caterers in seaside resorts who display notices to the effect that teas will be served. If these people, having got their ration of sugar, have to look for an increase, or if they consider that the allowance granted is not sufficient, they are asked to furnish an auditor's report. As Deputy Corish pointed out, many of these people never heard of an auditor, and those who did never had occasion to employ an auditor, and that requirement is an extreme hardship on them. If they are able to give fairly satisfactory proof, it ought to be accepted.

With regard to price control, I do not now propose to go into the large issues to which the Minister referred, or to deal with the difficulties which he magnified in his opening address, but there is one commodity which appears to everybody to have gone practically uncontrolled since the start of the war, that is, clothing. I do not know whether the Minister has bought any suits since the war, but, in the last couple of years, the price of suits has practically doubled, and there appears to be no valid reason why retailers should be allowed to charge the prices they are now charging, and no necessity for increasing prices to the level which they have recently reached. I do not know whether they have increased commensurately the pay of their workers—I have no information that they have— and certainly no information is available that the price of cloth in unmade-up condition has increased to such an extent as would justify the very steep increase in the price of clothes recently.

In conclusion, I should like to condemn some of the irresponsible statements made by Deputy Giles and definitely dissociate myself from them. There are a few Deputies who are allowed a certain licence and Deputy Giles appears to be one of them, but I do not wish to find myself associated with his statements.

Mr. Cafferky

There is only one important point to which I want to refer as I will not have the opportunity of putting down a Parliamentary Question in regard to it. It is the matter of scythe blades for mowing grass. In my part of the country and in most of the counties in Connacht, the grass is generally cut by hand and there is a very severe shortage of these blades at present. I should like to know if the Minister can do anything about it. Bad as the shortage is, the price is exorbitant. What is called the Tyzack blade costs anything from £1 to 35/-. A few decent shopkeepers will sell the blades at 25/-, but even that is exorbitant. Considering that last year they could be bought at from 10/- to 15/-, I cannot understand why this year we should have to pay 25/- to 35/- for them.

I should like to remind the Minister that there is yet much dissatisfaction with regard to the prices of boots, shoes and clothes. Whether that dissatisfaction is based on wrong information or not, I do not know, but the people in my part of the country are of the opinion that the prices of these articles are exorbitant and that the business folk concerned are allowed too large a profit. I have had contact with different business people and some say that even at the controlled price they can make over 100 per cent. profit. How true that is, I do not know, but I cannot see why they should tell lies. I do not know anything about the business, but I paid ten guineas for the suit I am wearing, and I was told by a neighbour of mine who carries on business in the city here that if I had got it in Dublin I would have paid 15 guineas for it. I was leaving an order for a suit and he asked me what I paid for the suit I was wearing. When I told him, he said: "If you had got a suit of the same quality here, it would have cost you 15 guineas." I would not be so much surprised at that state of affairs down the country, where an official of the Department of Supplies might call at a particular establishment only once in three months, but it seems strange that those excessive prices can be charged in the City of Dublin. The Minister has now brought in a new Order controlling the price of every article on the market at the May, 1944, level. While I fully realise the necessity for such an Order, I did expect that the Minister, before bringing it into operation, would revise the prices of certain articles such as clothes and other items which in my opinion are exorbitant. I think it is unfair to control prices at the May, 1944, level, because it was undoubtedly too high.

I should also like to mention that it is very difficult to get supplies of horse-shoe iron, horse-shoe nails and blacksmiths' coal. That may not be the fault of the Minister, but the people in the trade would welcome any steps he may be able to take to remedy the situation.

Deputy Giles was of opinion that we should be very proud of the fact that we can go over to England and earn our living there. He seemed to think that for that reason we should take off our hats to the British authorities. I never heard of anybody going over to England and getting work there simply because the English people love us. They need us, and that is the only reason why our people get work there. Those of our people who get work in England have to earn whatever they find in their pay envelopes at the end of the week.

Those are the only points to which I wished to refer. I would again earnestly request the Minister to do what he can to ensure supplies of horse-shoe iron, horse-shoe nails, coal for blacksmiths, and, in particular, scythe blades, because I promised the people concerned that I would put down a Parliamentary question, but owing to the fact that the Dáil may adjourn very soon I could not receive an answer before the recess. I trust that the Minister will give due consideration to the matters I have mentioned.

Mr. Beegan

I should like to call the attention of the Minister to the fact that in my part of the country last year a number of traders were very irritated by visits from the Department's inspectors just a few days before Christmas. It is undoubtedly very irritating that those visits from inspectors should take place when the shop is full of customers. It may be argued that the inspectors have to go through their ordinary routine, but I think that during Christmas week they could find sufficient work in compiling their reports on previous inspections instead of visiting busy shops and taking up the time of the owner or manager. I hope that will not occur in future.

On the question of turf production, we all know that it is a very big and difficult job to supply the need of cities like Dublin, Limerick and other non-turf areas. Numerous complaints are being made regarding the quality of the turf supplied, and it is difficult to understand why anything other than grade A turf should be transported to Dublin and other cities. Where there is grade B turf, it should be allowed to remain on the bogs until it is sufficiently dry, and in the matter of transport preference should be given to grade A turf. In the case of bogs, such as those in my county, where only grade A turf is produced, they should be given first preference for transport facilities. It is questionable whether or not the present system of turf production by the county councils is the proper one. In my opinion, classification by weight is very deceptive. The county surveyors are only human beings, and are naturally anxious to show the best returns, so that when the turf is classified by weight there is undoubtedly a tendency to allow a certain amount of moisture to remain in it. The gangers and supervisors know very well that it is up to them also to produce big quantities. I think it would be a much better system if the turf were graded according to quality. Turf which appears to be fairly dry may not be of very good burning quality, and it is desirable that the turf which is brought to Dublin and other cities should be of the best grade. I think the prevailing system of grading turf by weight instead of by quality is responsible for the high moisture content. I know that in the Turf Development Board and in the Minister's Department there are plenty of people who are capable of seeing that the turf is properly graded according to quality, and that only the very best turf comes to Dublin. I am very much interested in the future of the turf industry in this country, and I am quite sure that there are numerous people in our towns who, if they were supplied with turf that was up to the standard that they believed it should be, would never go back to any other fuel. As I have said, I am not finding fault with anybody, but while we have the weight system the tendency is there not to dry the turf as well as it should be dried.

There is another matter, of which I have been reminded by what Deputy Cafferky said, that I desire to bring to the Minister's attention. I am sure that applications are flowing in by the hundred to the Minister for Agriculture for reapers and binders. Of course, we know that the demand cannot be nearly supplied. I wonder would it be possible to get our manufacturers of machinery implements to undertake the manufacture of the ordinary reaping gear for the ordinary mowing machine. During the past year or two this reaping gear has been in short supply; and, in fact, could not be procured at all. If it were possible to get material to make it, it certainly would be very beneficial to have it this year when there will be such a large acreage of grain crop to be reaped. I know that there are smiths all over the country who are quite capable of making these parts if they could get the material. One of the big difficulties is to find a second seat for these machines. I am certain there must be a big number of old discarded machines through the country from which the seats could be collected, so that the gear that I speak of might be utilised. Instead of looking for tractors, reapers and binders or horse-reapers, particularly in the areas where we have the small type of farmer, it would be very useful indeed if we had supplies of this reaping gear. To a considerable extent, it would help to meet the demand there is on the Minister for Agriculture to supply what he is not able to get in from outside.

Mr. Hughes

In discussing this Estimate I am sure the Deputies have no desire to minimise in any way the difficulties and complexities of the problems that are the responsibility of the Minister for Supplies. We all appreciate that he has a difficult and complex job to tackle. I suppose, no matter what efforts are made, there will always be a certain amount of criticism of the Minister. He said himself that he appreciated that that was so. I agree with him that, so far as the members of the House are concerned, whatever criticism we have to offer relates to policy rather than to the work of his officials. I think we all appreciate that their efforts are of the highest standard. Deputies who have to visit the Department have experienced from the officials nothing but courtesy and a desire to meet the representations they make on behalf of individual citizens.

In regard to a matter that I am about to refer to, I want an assurance from the Minister that there is no deliberate intention on his part or on the part of the Government behind it. The matter is this: that I feel a definite attempt is being made to make use of, to convert, the Department of Supplies into a political organisation—that if representations are made to the Department by a Fianna Fáil Deputy and by a Deputy from another Party, there is a subtle difference in the letter that is received by the Fianna Fáil Deputy and the letter that is received by the Deputy of another Party. I have had the experience myself of comparing the letters, and I think it is highly improper. It may have been accidental, but if that is deliberate policy it is highly improper. This House should be vigorous in its condemnation of any attempt to make use of any Department of State for political purposes. The sort of reply that I have referred to conveys the idea that the representations made by the Fianna Fáil Deputy had the desired effect, while the letter going out to another Deputy conveys the simple information that the Minister has made a decision on the matter in question. I want the House to appreciate that there is a subtle difference so far as the draft of the two letters is concerned. I want to condemn vigorously any attempt on the part of the Minister's Department to make use of a State Department——

Mr. L.J. Walsh

That is an unfair accusation to make without producing any proof.

Mr. Hughes

I want the Minister to deal with that. If Deputy Walsh wants to talk about the matter he will have his opportunity of doing so.

Mr. L.J. Walsh

I think as much about it as, perhaps, the Deputy does, but I do not blow so much boloney as he does.

Mr. Hughes

So far as other Departments are concerned, I have not got a trace of that in them. I have compared replies received by individuals down the country which emanated from the Minister's Department. It may be accidental as I have said, but I want an assurance from the Minister, when replying, that that is not deliberate policy, because if it were, it would be contemptible and highly improper if any Department of State were going to be used as a political Department. The Departments here are national services maintained by the taxpayers. They are not the property of any political Party and neither is the Civil Service the particular service of any political Party. They are all State services. I want to make it perfectly clear that so far as civil servants are concerned their attitude to Deputies generally could not be questioned. They are courteous and anxious to do what they can for them. I am merely referring to the letters that are sent out in reply to representations that are made, and I would be glad to have an assurance from the Minister on the matter.

The Minister invited the House to discuss price control and the operation of the Standstill Order. Unfortunately, I was not present to hear the Minister's statement, but I understand that he dealt at length with this whole problem of price control. I agree that it is not a simple matter. It is highly complex and has a variety of aspects. I am not satisfied that many of the prices in operation, and fixed by Order of the Minister, are justified in present circumstances. Other Deputies have referred to the price of clothes. When one takes into account the price of the raw material, and makes allowance for whatever increase has resulted from increases in wages, I do not think that the ultimate price charged for clothes can be justified in our circumstances. The price of raw materials for the agricultural industry can scarcely be justified either. We have been told that the farmer and the agricultural community generally are comparatively well-off to-day. That may appear to be so, judging by the substanstial increase in the prices which the agricultural community are receiving for their produce. It may appear at first sight that they are well-off, but the costs of production are a very different matter at the present time. In my opinion they are proportionately higher than the prices which the farmer is receiving for his produce. That is a very serious matter. Some Deputies mentioned sweets. I know a particular agent of a big manufacturer here, who was working on a salary and commission basis, and who went around the country for weeks boasting that the amount of commission he was drawing on the sale of sweets ran into four figures. He was showing his cheque around to the public. Just imagine a man selling sweets on salary and commission and his commission running into four figures. I do not know much about sweets, but that indicates that there must be a very substantial margin to play with between the traveller and his agents.

One of the reasons why I say there is room for considerable criticism in regard to the system of price control is that the Minister has not taken the people sufficiently into his confidence. He may tell us that he has had consultations, but I do not think he has consulted people sufficiently on these problems. He should have at his disposal advisory committees on all these matters—even from his own point of view, to save himself from criticism. If Deputies understood that there were properly constituted advisory committees, representing the producers and consumers, they would have to accept the decision, if the Minister were able to say: "I have all that machinery and have put the problem before them; they gave me advice on it and the decision I have put into operation is their decision."

The Minister feels that he himself and his civil servants are so expert on these complex matters that they are capable of making a decision, without consulting with other people at all. Sometimes, when individuals are consulted, they do not appear to be the right individuals in the circumstances. My criticism all along, so far as the fixing of prices is concerned, is that the Minister should look into it from the consumers' point of view, taking all the ramifications into account. It is a matter of consulting the right people and the Minister has not gone far enough at all in that direction. Where there is a shortage of essential goods and where there must be control, to ensure equitable distribution and a fair price, one can understand that drastic action is very often necessary; but there are sometimes complaints that severe measures are taken against individuals in this respect.

Some decent, reputable traders have been brought into public odium. The Minister should have some regard for that aspect of the problem, as it gives the poorer classes the impression that some man is robbing them. Sometimes, we hear too much about racketeers and the black market, and every man in the commercial life of the country is suspect. It is true that there are people in the black market here, and getting away with it, very few of them being caught; but, unfortunately, in our attempt to stop them, we have brought into court reputable traders and honest men under certain emergency Orders, holding them up to disgrace and to public odium. That is bad policy and creates a false impression on the public generally. If we have not some regard for the good conduct of an individual who is supplying a large area of the country, it does not look very well for the future of the country. We deliberately give people the wrong impression that a man is taking advantage of a situation, when he is brought to court merely for accidentally overcharging a penny or two.

I have in mind a particular man, who is a tremendous asset to a backward part of the country. He does not happen to be in my constituency, but I know the facts very well in his particular case. The auditor stated in court that he had examined 1,500 items in that man's books and there were two cases of overcharging—one of 2d. and another of 3d. The Minister's inspectors, having gone through the books and gone through the 1,500 items, saw fit to prosecute. Does this House approve of that method of trying to enforce Emergency Powers Orders? Surely, that is not the type of individual to bring into court and hold up to all the odium attaching to that sort of prosecution? It reminds me of the busy policeman, chasing a fellow who has no lamp on his bicycle, while there is a robbery going on at the other end of the street. That is the result of the close supervision that the Department is giving to matters of that sort at the present time.

We are told stories, and I have heard that there is a certain attempt now made that is completely foreign to the methods of administration in this country—that is, the agent provocateur. I know one particular case, in the town of Athy, where attempts were made to provoke an individual to commit a crime of that sort. I am sure that does not meet with the Minister's approval and I have no doubt that he has not given any such instructions; but where a number of individuals is employed on temporary work of that sort, we must be careful that they are thoroughly instructed as to the manner in which they should carry out their duties.

In regard to the keeping of records, the small rural shopkeepers and hucksters have experienced a lot of difficulty. Some of them are almost illiterate and do not understand these records. The inspectors have not been at all helpful, but apparently, are anxious all the time to catch someone and get a case, at all costs. That is a wrong attitude. The inspectors should adopt an attitude of helpfulness, especially where there is no desire on the part of an individual citizen to break the regulations in any way. If he has failed to comply with an Order through ignorance, or through failure to appreciate its implications, and has no desire to overcharge, and if the inspectors are satisfied that he is a good citizen, there should be co-operation and anxiety to help that trader in his difficulties.

I have had experience of one particular man who has a grocer's establishment and a chemist's shop. He looks after the chemist's end of the business himself and has a manager for the grocery department. He got into some difficulty about his records and was very worried about them. He remembered that, over the wireless, the Minister asked for the co-operation of traders in the matter of supply and distribution. On the Minister's invitation, he wrote to the Department, saying that he had got into difficulties about his records and indicated generally what was wrong—that he had trusted the manager to look after the records. He asked for an inspection of the whole matter, so as to have his records straightened out, to see that he complied with the regulations. Two inspectors were sent down, as a result of that invitation, and there was a prosecution of that man, who was sincerely worried about his position. It was merely a technical offence, a matter of complying with certain regulations, as he had not overcharged. His manager had assured him that everything was all right and, when he discovered they were not right and invited the co-operation of the Department, taking the Minister at his word, he was prosecuted. If that is the policy of the Department it is not going to get co-operation along such lines.

I listened to Deputy Beegan's remarks with some interest. In his own way Deputy Beegan makes very useful suggestions. The suggestion he made about grading turf was not made here for the first time. It is altogether wrong to have turf sold on a weight basis. That is an inducement to people who produce and sell turf to preserve the moisture, rather than to dry it out. Human nature being what it is, we should take the human aspect into account, that people will be tempted to sell water instead of turf. While we base the unit of sale on a weight basis rather than the volume we are going to have bad turf with a high moisture content. I do not come from a turf district, but practical men who come from turf districts offered suggestions to the Minister over and over again. They know what they are talking about; they know everything about turf because they have been watching it being produced all their lives. When suggestions come from practical men they should be examined. If they are not examined what is the use of discussing this question or what is the purpose of this Parliament? Is the advice of sincere men to be turned down because armchair producers in some Department in Dublin decide otherwise? I have not yet met technicians who were not beaten by practical men who knew the ins and outs of production from start to finish. Invariably it is found that technicians and practical men agree in the end. Where there is a difference of opinion practical men's suggestions are always found to be sound. One man may have certain theories, but practical experience is better. Deputy Beegan dealt with the position in a practical way when he said that even county surveyors, in order to show good results to county councils and county managers, would be tempted to preserve the water rather than to dry it out of turf.

The Minister was very complimentary to the new Shipping Board. I suppose so far as the operation of the ships goes the position is highly satisfactory. Deputy Dillon suggested that although the members of the board give their services free, and have not looked for any reward, there are other ways and means of making money out of it. I am sure the Minister will deal with that aspect in his reply. He informed the House that the British Admiralty had withdrawn shipping from here. I imagine that is because of the Second Front operations. Can the Minister give any information as to when that shipping may be restored and as to future supplies of petrol, kerosene and coal? It would be of interest to the House and the country if the Minister could make a statement holding out any hope in that respect. On the question of supplies and distribution, the Minister indicated that two-thirds of our shipping capacity is being used in the transport of imported wheat. That is a very impressive figure, notwithstanding all our efforts at wheat production. One of the problems confronting the country, particularly the agricultural industry, concerns supplies of artificial manure. Despite the substantial subsidies being paid for the production of phosphates we are still severely handicapped by shortage, and I appeal to the Minister to make every possible effort to get increased supplies of artificial manures. We got a very small quantity of nitrate of ammonia, but it was negligible having regard to our requirements. I often felt that the efforts made by the Department to secure essential supplies of that kind, particularly sulphate of ammonia, could be made in a more impressive way.

Speaking in the National University some months ago the Minister boasted that our exports were double our imports, and that when dealing with post-war supplies we were building up sterling assets that could be used to secure capital imports. Strange to say the first day the House assembled after the general election the Minister for Agriculture remarked, possibly in the heat of the moment, that imports did not matter. I do not know which policy is the policy of the Government —that of the Minister for Supplies or that of the Minister for Agriculture. I would not be inclined to rely too much on the building up of sterling assets, or that we will be permitted to use these assets in the post-war period. No matter how willing the British Government would be to agree to the use of the assets they may find it expedient to liquidate their debts in goods, so that our aim ought to be to extend production, particularly agricultural production, because that will always be the great medium of foreign exchange.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy is now outside the Estimate.

Mr. Hughes

I am coming to supplies.

An Ceann Comhairle

Agricultural exports?

Mr. Hughes

I am arguing that we cannot import if we do not export. Supplies generally are our biggest problem, and the raw materials for agricultural production are artificial manures. They are essential imports. We have failed to secure supplies of sulphate of ammonia except in small quantities. Two or three years ago, when we were discussing this matter, the Minister pointed out that our power to bargain was nil and that the sooner we made up our minds about that the better. I do not think that the method which the Government and the Minister have adopted of making representations in the matter of supplies to the British Government through civil servants is the most effective method that could be adopted. I pointed out here before that, notwithstanding what the Minister said about our power to bargain being nil because the commodities we exported in the past—butter, eggs, bacon and so forth—have now disappeared, we have an outstanding bargaining weapon in our dairy stock. We should appreciate the problem which Great Britain has had during the war, and still has, regarding her milk supply and we should have regard to her public health policy to increase the consumption of milk.

I do not know whether or not the Minister realises that Great Britain is surreptitiously raiding this country of her best milkers and of her best maiden heifers. I am not against that. I believe that it could be developed still further and that not merely could we supply our own requirements but that we could have a substantial and profitable monopoly export-trade as well. This is the only country where Britain in the past got basic stock for dairy purposes and it is the only country in which it is likely to get such stock in the future. Strange as it may seem, we are able to produce better and more suitable stock for this purpose than they are capable of producing themselves. There are qualities in our soil peculiarly suitable to that purpose and we have not utilised that asset to the extent we might. They have been taking all the available surplus dairy stock for the past three or four years and we could have said that we appreciated that they had a milk problem and try to utilise that as a bargaining weapon.

As regards supplies of nitrogenous manure, that is a synthetic product manufactured by Imperial Chemicals. A good deal of sulphate of ammonia has found its way from across the Border into the black market here and I think that that position could have been rectified by Ministerial contacts with the other side. The British have never acted the part of Shylock or looked for their pound of flesh. If we put up a reasonable business proposition, they were always prepared to have a deal with us. While the Minister fails to make any effort in that respect, I shall continue to be critical of the methods used in attempting to secure essential supplies.

As pointed out by the Minister for Finance, Great Britain has, notwithstanding all the difficulties, released a considerable volume of essential goods to this country. On that basis, one could argue convincingly on the lines on which I am attempting to argue. Definite efforts should have been made to obtain supplies on the lines I have pointed out. It should have been explained that we were anxious to cooperate so far as food production was concerned, and that we could only cooperate on the basis of some effort on their part to supply us with essential raw materials. Whatever surplus resulted from those efforts would be to their advantage because we can only consume what will fill the stomachs of our people. If our resources were properly organised and utilised, we should have a very substantial surplus for export. Much more could have been made of that situation than was made, and the House is entitled to be critical of the Minister's attitude. Sending a civil servant to the telephone at this end to get in touch with his counterpart on the other side, or with the High Commissioner, is not sufficient. In the post-war period, capital goods to replace worn-out machinery, provide for the mechanisation of agriculture and to replenish the larder of industry must, eventually, be paid for out of our surplus agricultural production. Bearing that in mind, the Minister seemed at one time to have been thinking along the line that we were building up sterling assets which could be used in that period. Even at the present time, we should be making better use of our position.

The whole method of producing and selling turf appears to be very costly. Deputy Beegan is perfectly right when he says that there is no justification for the weight basis in regard to turf. It is an inducement to preserve the water in turf rather than produce good, dry turf.

Mr. L.J. Walsh

I had no intention of taking part in this debate but I think I should be failing in my duty if I did not challenge Deputy Hughes to produce proof of the charges he has made against what I consider one of the best Departments of State—the Department of Supplies. I think that every Deputy must have had experience of dealing with that Department and I challenge Deputy Hughes or any other Deputy to produce proof that favouritism is shown to Government Deputies in that Department. I think that that was a very unfair charge to make against a Department and, particularly, against officials who cannot defend themselves. It is fortunate for that Department that it has a very able Minister who can defend it against all comers and against all forms of attack.

We hear a great deal about supplies and about fault being found with the Department for taking action against certain people for overcharging. It strikes me that if some Deputies had their way we would have the quota removed and the black market welcomed and certain individuals would be waxing fat upon the people. I have no doubt the Minister will not give way to those appeals. I urge the Minister not to waver in his determination to protect the plain people against the racketeers and those who carry on the black market in this State. The Minister for Supplies would be failing in his duty if he relaxed by one iota the instructions he has issued to his Department to see that the people are protected from these perils. There is no Deputy who is not well aware that, in every city, town and village in this State, there are people watching for an opportunity to indulge in the black market and wax fat upon the people. In my view the Department of Supplies deserves the gratitude of the people for the way in which it has protected them during this emergency. I only hope that the Minister will continue to see that those instructions are enforced and that the people will be amply protected.

Mr. M.E. Dockrell

I know that the Minister is aware of the important part that cement plays in the life of the community. I do not think there is any item in the country outside the range of foodstuffs which is of more importance, especially from the point of view of employment. The lack of cement has paralysed the building industry and I would be failing in my duty if I did not emphasise the grave unemployment which the lack of that one commodity is causing. I will ask the Minister to use his very great powers to see that cement is brought back into the market as soon as possible.

Mr. Coburn

I should like to support the remarks made by Deputy Dockrell. I hope the Minister will be in a position to tell us to-night that the supply of cement will be resumed as speedily as possible. I am quite aware that owing to circumstances over which the Minister has no control the supply of cement has ceased. Let us hope that that is only a temporary thing. I must impress on the Minister the necessity of conserving whatever cement supplies remain for the use of builders who at the moment are engaged in the building of houses. Some of these houses are very near completion, but, owing to the scarcity of cement, the builders will not be in a position to finish those houses which are so badly needed by the people. These people have to put up with great inconvenience occupying rooms, often enough in tenements, while waiting for the houses to be completed.

Another reason why I should like the Minister to clarify the situation as soon as possible is that the employers who answered the call sent out by the Minister, when he exhorted them to keep in employment as many of their men as possible, should be given an opportunity of seeing where they stand. I am interested in the building trade and I know that many employers, when they have a good staff, do not like to dismiss anyone. At the same time they cannot continue paying men who are doing very little work, if any. These employers enter into contracts after very severe competition. They would like to know their position in regard to future supplies of cement.

The Minister asked for our ideas in relation to price control. That is a very difficult matter on which to give an opinion. We Irish people have never been amenable to discipline and we might as well own up to that. When the Minister controls prices he is blamed, and he is also blamed if he does not control them; if he prosecutes people he is blamed, and if he does not prosecute them he is still blamed. We draw all sorts of comparisons with the British. The first thing we try to do is to circumvent whatever Orders are made by the Minister. I have witnessed people giving 1/- or 2/- more for a certain commodity notwithstanding that they were warned by the Civic Guards that they should not do so. At times I have the utmost sympathy with the Minister in his difficulties. I hope Deputies on the opposite benches will not be offended at what I am going to say. You are all shouting: "Stand by Dev." and "Ireland needs Dev. and we should obey him." So far as I can see, people obey him only on the day of the election and they do not seem anxious to obey his orders when his Government is elected. The extraordinary thing is that many of the people who are his greatest supporters are the very first to go against the Orders made by his responsible Ministers, and those who, possibly, vote against the Government are the people who, as far as is humanly possible, are anxious to carry out whatever Orders are made by the Minister.

As regards turf, many suggestions have been made about the quality and the quantity of turf. We are told it should be graded. I know very little about turf, but I can tell by experience I have had in other directions that so far as turf is concerned you could not grade it, and I say that with all respect to Deputy Beegan. In the first place, you would lose a lot of time examining the turf and you would have to deal with it almost sod by sod. You must take into consideration also the question of the spread ground. If people were to allow turf to remain on the spread ground until it was absolutely devoid of moisture, you would cover all Ireland with it. You must get the stuff away in order to make room for the new turf. It has been suggested by Deputy Allen that as the turf comes in from the turf-producing areas it should be put into the merchants' yards. Most of the merchants can accommodate only very little turf. When 20, 30 or 40 wagons arrive you have to get the turf to the dump. There is a certain amount of waste and the cost is increased by the handling.

That is what you are up against, and Deputies must recognise the fact that, as regards the turf produced in Donegal or Galway, if any of us got a present of it, it would cost us about £4 before we had it delivered in our backyard. It has to be handled for the purpose of transport and again handled when put into ricks, and we must take into consideration the segregation of the wet from the dry turf and conveying it to the dumps. Every operation adds to the expense. I cannot see how we can have cheap turf. It was stated that turf was sold at 25/- to 30/- per ton. I rather think it was 25/- to 30/- per creel—some little cart holding 4 cwt. or 5 cwt. I would like to see turf sold at 35/- or £2 a ton, but I cannot see how it could be done.

Neither can I see how the private producer can produce turf in the way suggested here. Deputies have mentioned the organisation of private producers in order to produce sufficient turf to meet at least some of our requirements. It is all right for private producers to produce sufficient turf for themselves, but where is the guarantee that in the winter 450,000 people in Dublin, 40,000 people in other cities and 15,000 to 20,000 people in various towns throughout the country will be supplied with all the turf they need? I suggest there must be some central authority, someone in supreme command, some big organisation that the Minister can hold responsible for the production of turf. It is a good thing to have as many private producers as possible; each in his own area will help to fill a gap, as it were, and relieve the situation as far as possible; but I have come to the conclusion that although it may be a little more expensive, you must have some central authority that will guarantee to the people in our cities and towns a sufficient quantity of turf when they need it. As regards the question of coal for steam threshing engines, I wonder could the Minister take steps to have a certain quantity of coal imported for that specific purpose. There is a certain amount of reluctance on the part of owners of threshing sets to use turf and sticks owing to the danger of fire during threshing operations. I would ask the Minister to do all that is humanly possible to have a sufficient quantity of coal for these threshing engines imported between now and the threshing season.

We all know that there is a shortage of many commodities. We all know that many things are dear. Of course, that is due to the difficulties of getting raw material. It was stated to-day that the cost of a suit of clothes at the present time is from 12 to 15 guineas. I think that is exaggerated. I think you can get a very good suit of clothes for from eight to nine guineas.

Mr. L.J. Walsh

Come to Drogheda and Dundalk and we will supply them and we will not ask 15 guineas.

Mr. Coburn

It is difficult to get the raw materials and consequently everything has increased in price. Reference has been made to the increased cost of turf. The men who are making the turf are entitled to increased wages to meet the high cost of living. Nobody will begrudge them their few shillings a week but that is one of the factors that contribute to the increased cost of turf. We cannot have it every way. I would particularly press upon the Minister that he should clarify the position so far as cement is concerned because that is one of the things that affect employment at the present time. Those engaged in the building trade are handicapped enough by lack of materials, especially timber and other goods required for the building trade without having this primarily essential commodity taken off the market. I hope the Minister will be in a position to announce at an early date that the various factories in the country will be able to resume the manufacture of cement.

Mr. Lemass

I, perhaps, was unduly optimistic in raising the general question of price control policy in the course of this discussion because there is, I understand, a general feeling that it is desirable to terminate this session of the Dáil and, consequently, there is a natural reluctance on the part of Deputies to initiate a debate upon what is a matter of intricate policy. I think Deputies, however, might have left it at that rather than make the excuse that they had not got enough information to enable them to offer a firm opinion upon the issues of policy to which I referred. I do not think that there is much difficulty in procuring the information necessary to arrive at a decision, and in fact these issues were raised by me in the Dáil before, and I presume Deputies at the time gave them consideration. Certainly, the Parties that have frequently referred to price control in the past, who have criticised the Government's administration of price control, might reasonably be expected to have considered these issues on their own initiative, not when they were raised by a Minister in the course of debate. No information is required to enable the various Parties in this Dáil to decide upon the main issue of the price control policy. There are only two courses possible. These courses were explained to the Dáil before. They were explained again this morning.

We can have a policy designed to maintain employment even if it means higher prices or we can have a policy designed to keep prices down even if it means more unemployment. No information is required to enable a decision to be made as between one course and the other. The Government decided in favour of a policy of maintaining employment even if it meant higher prices. We knew that that policy would lead to a rise in prices to a level higher than would otherwise be necessary. We knew we would be criticised by people who would object to that rise in the prices level, that we would have statements made, such as were made to-day by Deputy Morrissey, that the cost of living was being allowed to rise unchecked and that the resulting price situation would be attributed to Government incompetence rather than to a deliberate decision on policy.

Now we have, in the circumstances created by the shortage of fuel and electricity, decided temporarily on the reverse policy. We have decided that, instead of maintaining employment even if it means higher prices, we will for the time being keep prices at a standstill even if it means unemployment, even if it means that we have to do without certain supplies or to face a reduced output of certain goods. Deputies have been non-committal in relation to that policy. Deputy Dillon said that it is an impracticable policy, that the Government were foolish to have decided upon it because the Department of Supplies could not administer it. I agree with him if it is to be regarded as a permanent arrangement. I think it is a practicable policy for a temporary period because the social and economic consequences of it in a temporary period will be offset by the voluntary action of employers in maintaining their workers on their wage lists provided they can feel that, at a later stage, the original policy of the Government will be restored.

It is, however, between these two policies that choice must be made. It is between these two policies that the Government chose in the past and those who want to criticise the Government must also choose between them. They certainly cannot have the advantages of both policies and if they are prepared to agree with our view that the circumstances of this country required that we should maintain employment at the maximum level even if it meant letting prices go higher than they otherwise need be, then we ask them not at the same time to criticise the Government for not keeping prices at the lowest possible level. We could undoubtedly bring prices down substantially but at the expense of closing down a large number of factories and putting a big number of people out of employment, cutting every uneconomic and unnecessary cost in every sphere.

This matter of price control must not be mixed up with the subsidiary matter of profit control. There is a problem in relation to profit control which I also put to the Dáil and on which I asked the opinion of the Parties in Opposition. We controlled the profits of trading firms, whether manufacturing or distributing firms, by making arrangements with them or giving them directions as to the maximum amount of profit they can make in a trading period. But, as I explained to the Dáil, one can never find out if, in fact, these arrangements are being adhered to until the period is over, until it is possible to get the accounts for the period and examine them and see whether the firm did or did not exceed the profit which was deemed to be reasonable.

The weakness of our system of control is that, at that stage, the only alternative is to require the firm to give back the excess profit, if there was an excess profit, by maintaining prices in the subsequent period at a lower level than would otherwise have been approved. It is true that some proportion of the excess profits is taken by the excess profits tax for the benefit of the Exchequer. But, even in connection with that tax, there is, as I explained previously, a repayment clause which requires the Exchequer to repay the amount of such tax to the firm concerned if, in some subsequent period, that firm makes losses. Quite a number of firms, appreciating the importance of having that credit established during the war because of the possibility of losses in the immediate post-war period, are not on that account as concerned as they should be in keeping profits within the limits deemed reasonable. You, therefore, have a position in which the penalty for taking profit in excess of that considered reasonable is not sufficiently severe to deter firms from taking the risk that will develop. Can we improve the penalty? It is because I believe that we can improve the penalty and make it unlikely that firms will take the risk that I offered the suggestion to-day that we should have some device by which the whole of any amount earned by a firm in profits over and above the amount considered reasonable should be absorbed into the Exchequer.

Mr. D. Morrissey

Why not take 100 per cent.?

Mr. Lemass

That is the suggestion.

Mr. D. Morrissey

The Government were asked before to do that from this side of the House.

Mr. Lemass

The Deputy is wrong in that.

Mr. D. Morrissey

No.

Mr. Lemass

In any case, that is the suggestion made, although I gathered from the leader of the Fine Gael Party that there was a certain objection in principle to it. If that suggestion comes forward, I want Deputies to understand that drastic powers must be given to somebody to determine absolutely and finally what is a reasonable profit for any firm and the amount to be taken in fines for making profits in excess of that.

Mr. D. Morrissey

They are doing that in Great Britain all the time.

Mr. Lemass

They are not.

Mr. Flanagan

If the Minister wants any information about firms he should apply to Thompsons of Lower Gardiner Street.

Mr. Lemass

Deputy Flanagan should go down to some street corner. His tactics are more suitable to a street corner than to a legislative Assembly.

Mr. Flanagan

I indulged in no street corner stuff in Offaly.

Mr. Lemass

"Street corner stuff" was right.

Acting-Chairman (Mr. Allen)

The Deputy must be orderly.

Mr. Lemass

The position in Great Britain is entirely different. In Great Britain, they have a very specific obligation to repay to the firms that are contributing under their corporation profits tax after the war. Our obligation is only to repay, in the event of losses, a substantial portion of the amount paid in taxation. In Great Britain it must be repaid whether there is a loss or not.

Mr. D. Morrissey

The Minister is mixing up the two.

Mr. Lemass

That issue can be discussed and decided without any statistical data, such as Deputy Mulcahy is looking for. I must confess I was somewhat surprised at his suggestion that this matter should have been discussed with the trading organisations before being mentioned here. In fact, I feel quite certain that, if I did discuss it with the trading organisations, or with intelligent bodies of citizens, like Fianna Fáil Cumainn, before mentioning it here, I would be denounced violently here.

Mr. Flanagan

Intelligent bodies.

Mr. Lemass

Intelligent enough to get rid of the Deputy anyway.

Mr. Flanagan

And the Minister out of Offaly.

Mr. Lemass

Reference was made to the prices charged for drapery goods, particularly for boots and shoes. The House is aware that an elaborate system of control was brought into operation in respect of drapery goods in July last year which involved the fixation not merely of manufacturers' prices of all commodities, but the determination of margins which could be charged by wholesale and retail traders. That system has been in operation only since July. While I am prepared to agree that the margins fixed were liberal, it is not yet evident that these margins were such as to enable the traders concerned to make an undue profit. I do not say that that case cannot be made. In fact, I am arranging to have the question of the margins allowed to these wholesale and retail traders re-examined with a view to reduction. I think they can stand a reduction. But it will be understood that these margins were fixed upon the normal practice of these traders. There is this difference, that, in normal times, although a trader in drapery goods might endeavour to secure 50 per cent. upon the cost of goods when determining the selling price, in practice he would sell certain ranges below that margin and secure an over-all return upon all his sales of less than that. At present it is possible for a trader to secure the fixed margin upon all goods sold and, consequently, he earns a somewhat higher profit than he would in normal times, even though theoretically working on the same margin. However, the margins fixed for the distributive traders in respect of drapery and boots are to be reviewed in the light of the experience since the control came into operation.

I agree with Deputy Dillon that the price of pollard is too high. However, we did not fix the price of pollard in relation to its economic value or to its cost of production. We fixed it in relation to what the Minister for Finance is prepared to lose on the sale of pollard.

Mr. Cosgrave

Will the Minister consult the retail distributors about that?

Mr. Lemass

Not in the case of pollard. Pollard is the by-product of a subsidised commodity and the higher the price we can get for it, the less has to be paid in subsidy, and the lower the price we get for it, the more has to be paid in subsidy. The price fixed was deemed to be the price at which the material could be sold having regard to the price of other feeding stuffs. It was not sold at that price. This year there happens to be a fair supply of other feeding stuffs and the demand for pollard is less than had been anticipated when the decision was taken to increase the extraction from flour. The decision, however, is mainly one for the Minister for Finance, because of course, if the price has to be reduced, it means that he has to foot a larger bill.

Mr. Dillon

Do not let the pollard go bad.

Mr. Lemass

Deputy Dillon has made various remarks about Irish Shipping, Limited, which were based almost entirely upon a complete misunderstanding of the position of Irish Shipping, Limited.

Mr. Dillon

Why did you not explain the position?

Mr. Lemass

I propose to do so. May I say straight away that the balance sheet of Irish Shipping, Limited, is available for inspection but, apparently, Deputy Dillon has not inspected it?

Mr. Dillon

It contains none of the information that I want.

Mr. Lemass

Even the information it does contain might have been of some use to the Deputy. The Deputy got all his facts wrong. I think he was referring to the peninsular trade. In fact, none of the ships of Irish Shipping, Limited, have been engaged upon that trade. Traffic to peninsular ports has been taken by means of smaller ships owned by private shipping companies, although these ships at present operate under Government direction. The ships of Irish Shipping, Limited, are engaged entirely on the Atlantic trade. Managers of the ships are not paid upon a percentage basis. I understand that the practice is that there is a management fee fixed at a flat rate per ship per year. Certainly the total of the management fees would be considerably less than 1 per cent. of the freights earned. Deputy Dillon says, however, that freights are high and that Irish Shipping, Limited, are making substantial profits, or rather that they were endeavouring to secure that the entire cost of these ships would be liquidated by the freight earned by ten voyages. That is so wide of the mark that it is impossible to know what he is driving at. Freights are high for a number of reasons. I must concede that the ships were dear. We purchased these ships in abnormal circumstances and paid a price for them far above what would have been the normal peacetime price for vessels of the same size. The cost of operating these ships is high. The ships, as I say, are operated under abnormal circumstances. They are not allowed to take an outward cargo. The entire cost of operating these ships, both out and in, must be borne by the cargo inward, as there is no outward cargo at all. They have to follow a roundabout route which is determined by the Government of another country and not by ourselves. That route, moreover, is not the most economical route, and the high war risk insurance charges have to be met both in respect of the ships and the cargoes carried by them.

Mr. Dillon

These high war risk insurance premiums are paid to the company itself?

Mr. Lemass

But they are not any higher than they would be if they were not being paid to the company itself. The net result of all this is that freight charges are substantially higher now than they would be in peace times. There is very little profit made by the company on freights, and although I concede that the company is making big profits, it is mainly as a result of their entry into the marine insurance business, and not on freight charges, and its insurance charges at the open market rates. Nobody in this country has to pay more in insurance, and it is by reason of the entry of this company into the marine insurance business that its strong financial position has been realised, and that is costing the persons who are importing goods to this country not a single penny, besides which, it has caused the retention in this country of huge sums of money that would have had to be paid and would have left this country in other circumstances which, fortunately, did not arise.

Mr. Norton

Are these rates on a different basis from other rates?

Mr. Lemass

They are based upon the open market rates. In fact, the freights on the Atlantic route have been reduced by approximately 50 per cent. since the company entered into business.

Mr. Cosgrave

Does the company only insure its own ships?

Mr. Lemass

The company insures the ships and their cargoes, and also the aeroplanes operated by Aer Lingus, Teoranta. I was asked by a Deputy whether it would be possible to maintain the turf ration this year. I think so but, although it has been a good year, we are faced with the problem of transport. The supply of turf has never been a problem of production, but mainly of transport. Even though all the turf we require may be there, it still has to be transported. However, we think we can do it, but we aim not merely to transport the amount of turf required to maintain the ration, but an additional 200,000 tons to supply fuel for industries to which coal can no longer be supplied. It is partly as a result of the arrangements that had to be made to get that additional 200,000 tons that the change in regard to the supply to the institutions of local authorities was decided upon. These local institutions always wanted to buy their supplies from private producers, but they were prevented from doing that because it was felt that it would tend to force up the price of privately-produced fuel, and that the charge would be unduly high. We have now decided to allow them to do so in order to release the supplies of national turf that were previously kept for them. Deputy Roddy asked why turf is costing more this year than previously. It is because of the rise in the rate of wages. That is the only reason.

Mr. Dillon

Why not let these local institutions buy turf for their requirements in their own areas?

Mr. Lemass

We are allowing them to buy in their own areas.

Mr. Dillon

Why not allow them to do so now?

Mr. Lemass

The turf to which I am referring is required immediately for industrial purposes, and I want to put emphasis on the word "immediately." If we had more time we could, perhaps, retain the original policy, but it is because of the fact that on the 1st July, we want this supply of turf for industrial purposes that we have decided to allow the county councils to make arrangements to replace that turf by getting it from private producers for the winter months. Deputy Roddy also asked about the different prices as between privately-produced turf and county council turf. County council workers operate on the basis of a 48-hour week, or on the basis of a 54-hour week, whatever the local basis may be. It will be obvious that private producers, producing the quantity of turf that the county councils produced, would be charging much the same price as the county councils. It is the vast quantity that we require which makes it necessary to adopt the more costly methods the county councils are employing. If we only wanted the quantity that private producers are capable of supplying, then we could get it at a much lower price, but it is because we want very much more turf than that, that we cannot hope to meet our needs from the production of private producers alone. In fact, the various attempts that have been made to organise private producers and get them to extend their production of turf for national fuel were not very successful. I do not say that they were unsuccessful, but they did not produce anything like the quantity of turf required for national fuel. The cost of the production of turf, of course, varies from bog to bog, and nobody could attempt to say what it would be without knowing the circumstances of each bog.

I was also asked by a Deputy about the provision of petrol for the transport of turf from the bogs. That petrol is available, and has been available during the present month. I do not know what the position is in regard to the availability of lorries. That may be a local transport problem, which I cannot deal with now, but so far as the transport of turf from the bog to the town is concerned, petrol will be available.

Mr. Heskin

Is there any possibility of getting a Great Southern Railways lorry?

Mr. Lemass

Perhaps so, but I suggest that it might be better for the Deputy to take up that matter with the Great Southern Railways. With regard to the position of sugar, may I say, in reply both to Deputy Morrissey and Deputy Giles, that no sugar is being exported? We do export condensed milk, in the manufacture of which a certain quantity of sugar is used. We have always had an export trade in condensed milk, and we propose to continue it because it must be remembered that, in return for the condensed milk we export to Great Britain, we get back from the British tin containers for its preservation. It is an obvious and practical arrangement that we should continue that export when, in return, we are getting the tin containers, not merely for the condensed milk which we export, but also for the condensed milk for our home supplies.

With regard to supplies of sugar for caterers, it was obvious that the demand on hotels, restaurants, and other caterers, would increase as a result of the limitation on the supply of such commodities as sugar, tea, and so on, to the ordinary households. More people are eating out, and the demand on hotels and restaurants has been increasing because they need more for their increased custom resulting from the limitation on households, and every one of these hotels and restaurants seems to be having a business boom, which leads them to adopt every possible device to get more sugar. One of the devices adopted by them was to make an inaccurate return of the amount they got in the datum year. Where we found that they had made inaccurate returns, we endeavoured to penalise them by cutting down their current ration, to recover the amount they had been getting in excess. That seems to me to be only fair, and I think it would be very unfair to other traders that those traders who had got an unfair advantage as a result of inaccurate returns should not be penalised when the matter was discovered.

General MacEoin

But if their returns are not false, and the Minister thinks that they are false, is not the Minister the deciding factor?

Mr. Lemass

Well, I do not think so.

Mr. Dillon

A very common illusion.

Mr. Lemass

Deputy Cosgrave referred to certain difficulties in connection with the distribution of sweets. Most of these difficulties are due to the fact that a number of sweet manufacturers who are entitled to a supply of sugar as manufacturers and who are also sweet retailers, have been diverting a larger proportion of their output to their own retail shops at the expense of other retail customers. We are getting after these people and we shall make some arrangement which will ensure that the retail customers of these manufacturers will get their proper supplies.

Deputies will appreciate the impossibility of making any specific statement as to the likelihood of an adequate supply of paraffin oil or candles for domestic lighting purposes in the coming winter. I think we shall have a situation in which we shall be able to give as large, if not a larger, ration of paraffin oil during the winter months as last year or the previous year but the stuff is not here yet. Deputies will appreciate that that hope on my part is of no real significance until the material has arrived. Indications are, however, that we may get a supply of paraffin oil which will enable us to give as good a domestic ration for lighting purposes as last year, possibly better. As a matter of fact, in the case of candles we are making arrangements for the importation of materials required for candle manufacturing. If these materials arrive, we shall be able to increase the output of candles. I am hoping that they will arrive although certain difficulties have arisen in connection with that matter.

Mr. Dillon

You are not going to ration candles?

Mr. Lemass

We have not enough candles to ration and I can see no method by which we could ration candles. Anyway, it would be ludicrous to ration candles because we might find ourselves in the position in which we could give only one candle every three months or some such insignificant ration. We would have to get a much larger quantity of candles before we could enforce any rationing system.

Deputy Dockrell, and I think Deputy Coburn, urged that we should try to increase the output of cement, and Deputy Norton asked that we should give some definite indication as to what the situation in regard to cement is likely to be. I mentioned in the Dáil a short time ago that we had stopped the manufacture of cement. By that device, we saved 2,000,000 units of electricity this month. I stated at the time that we could not hope to continue that saving. The manufacture of cement must be resumed. In fact, we shall have to begin the manufacture of cement earlier than anticipated because stocks in the hands of the wholesale distributors appear to be less than was assumed, but the extent to which it will be possible to maintain the output of cement is somewhat difficult to forecast. Every effort will be made to maintain cement production at the maximum level because we appreciate its importance in relation to employment. I think we shall be able to ease the situation in July because there is a certain quantity of clinkers which requires only to be ground. It might be described as partially manufactured cement which can be turned into cement by the use of much less electricity than the complete manufacture of cement would require. I might say, however, with regard to Deputy Norton's representations as to the building of a cinema at Athy, that I would regard such a project as occupying a very low place in the priority list. In any event, I would probably be doing the promoters a good turn by withholding cement in that case because they would not be able to get electricity at present to run the cinema.

Mr. Norton

I was not concerned so much with that. I was concerned only with the matter from the point of view of the employment which it would provide.

Mr. Lemass

I know the Deputy would be concerned to make representations also in regard to the supply of electricity for the operation of the cinema. There are a number of other Deputies who are anxious to get electricity for cinemas in their areas and if I were to yield to Deputy Norton's representation, I would be letting them down.

Deputy Dillon urged that we ought to curtail public lighting. We have tried to curtail public lighting. In fact the distribution of electricity for this month is based on the assumption that its use for public lighting will be reduced by one half. We are not imposing by Government Order any specific restriction on public lighting, but we are endeavouring to secure the co-operation of public authorities in a reduction in the consumption of electricity for that purpose. The Electricity Supply Board is conducting a campaign along those lines and is endeavouring to secure the maximum saving. So far as the total cessation of public lighting is concerned my Department would have no objection. The objection came from the Department of Justice which visualised a very difficult police problem in the absence of public lighting, and also from certain other Departments. It was considered undesirable to cut out all public lighting but the consumption of electricity for public lighting is almost insignificant in relation to the consumption for domestic use and industrial purposes. The total consumption for public lighting is about 100,000 units. That is very small in relation to the total consumption of householders and industrial users. When I mention that for the manufacture of cement alone the normal consumption is 2,000,000 units per month, the small proportion required for public lighting purposes will be realised.

Mr. Dillon

Does that include the City of Dublin lighting?

Mr. Lemass

It includes public lighting for the whole State. Deputy Giles asked about the exportation of motor and cycle tyres. I explained the situation in regard to that matter to the Dáil before. When the Japanese invaded Burma, our supplies of raw rubber were dried up and there was no prospect of getting further supplies. We did, however, succeed in making arrangements under which we got certain quantities of rubber partly for the manufacture of tyres for our own use, and partly for the manufacture of tyres for export. If we were not prepared to export tyres, we would get no rubber, so that instead of losing tyres by that arrangement we are getting tyres which we could not procure otherwise.

The only other matter which calls for comment is that some Deputies referred to the possibility of discourtesy on the part of inspectors of the Department. Inspectors are given specific instructions to be not merely courteous in their relations with traders but that their function is not so much to catch out traders as to help them. I am quite certain that most of the complaints that are made concerning the conduct of the Department's inspectors come from people who have been irritated by the fact that they have been caught out. Traders, however, must be equally courteous to the inspectors. Our Department's function is to enforce these regulations, and I shall not accept from anybody the contention that failure to keep records is a trivial offence. Anybody who gets a supply of tea, sugar or butter for the purpose of distributing them to their customers and who decides that he is going to black market portion of these supplies, has first to fake the records. Failure to keep proper records is the first step in any black-marketing operation. When a trader is found to have faked his records so that a quantity of tea, sugar or butter supplied to him cannot be accounted for, that leads to a prosecution. If the failure is due to a mistake or to inability to understand the forms there is no prosecution. In that case the inspector fills up the forms for the trader and explains how he is to deal with them in future. Where, however, the failure is clearly a cover-up for the illegal sale of some of the commodities concerned we prosecute and it is only where there is positive evidence of deliberate irregularity and excessive prices that the prosecution is followed by withdrawal of the trading licence.

In the matter of prices control, Deputy Hughes appears to have the impression that we do not consult with traders or with advisory committees. We have so many advisory committees that it would take me half an hour to read out the list: I told Deputy Hughes before that there was full consultation in these matters, but I cannot get the Deputy to understand that. In matters affecting various trades there is full consultation, not merely with advisory committees established by the trades but very frequently with every individual firm in the trade concerned. I think I told the Dáil before that most business people complain that they spend more time in serving on these advisory committees than they do in the management of their own business.

Mr. Corish

I asked the Minister some questions which he has not answered, in relation to the manufacture and export of powdered milk and also in regard to the allocation of tyres for agricultural workers and road workers.

Mr. Lemass

As far as tyres are concerned, I cannot promise any system of allocation for road workers or farm workers. I have been frequently urged to allocate tyres to workers on essential services, but there are not enough tyres to enable that to be done. If we were to adopt a system of that kind for road workers or turf workers, we would leave many other classes, whose work is equally essential and who require tyres equally as urgently for their work, without any supplies at all. The only practical system is to distribute the tyres to the various traders in relation to the traders' previous sales and to rely on the traders, subject to the maintenance of records and the check on the records which the Department imposes, to see that they go to the people in greatest need of them. I am not quite sure that I understand the point about the powdered milk.

Mr. Corish

I want to know is it still being manufactured and exported to the same extent.

Mr. Lemass

Some quantity is being exported, but the total quantity of milk which goes into cheese, powdered milk or any use other than the manufacture of butter is so small in relation to the quantity used for the manufacture of butter that it would not alter the position in the least. We are, of course, in a bad year for milk production. Nevertheless, I think we can say that, on the look of the returns so far, it will be possible to restore the eight-ounce butter ration during the winter months.

Mr. Cosgrave

Deputy Hughes raised a small point about the form of letters from the Department.

Mr. Lemass

I can tell Deputy Hughes that so far as the officers of the Department are concerned, there is, of course, no discrimination as between members of one Party and another. In so far as letters from my own office are concerned, quite certainly there is such a discrimination. I write much more formally to a member of the Opposition Party than I do to somebody whom I know intimately on my own benches, but it certainly does not alter the decision.

Mr. Cosgrave

I myself noticed a slight difference in the form of a letter to a Fianna Fáil Deputy.

Mr. Dillon

You do not expect him to address you as "Dear Liam" and you to reply: "Dear Seán?"

An Ceann Comhairle

It is nearly 9 o'clock and I want to put the Vote.

Mr. Heskin

Could the Minister say anything about the allocation of binder twine for the coming year? I do not think any Deputy referred to the matter.

Mr. Dillon

There is plenty of binder twine.

Mr. Lemass

I think the supply will be adequate.

Mr. Cafferky

What about the scythe blades?

Mr. Lemass

Distribution is a matter for the Department of Agriculture.

Mr. Heskin

I was on the 'phone in Ballyduff last year looking for binder twine. It was in Cork and another man was also on the 'phone in Cork trying to get twine but it would not be released by the Department.

Mr. Lemass

That is a very complicated question to ask at nine o'clock at night.

Vote put and agreed to.

Progress reported: Committee to sit again to-morrow.